Eido Shimano agrees that a Zen teacher should not be sexual with students; however, this has never stopped him from being a pathological liar and sexual predator of his own sangha. Zenrin accepts that Eido Shimano has done the best he can and supports his continued teaching and actively continues to train with him.

I don’t care if Zenrin is a member of AZTA or not, we have no way to say if a member is in good standing or not. Nevertheless, I am in charge making additions and changes to the AZTA database, and I will not tolerate any longer the use of our database to refer people to a teacher and organization that continues to train with Eido Shimano. So hearing no objection I have deleted his listing from our public database.

If there is a vote to return him to our database, I will not implement it; however, I will resign from this organization and someone else may then restore it.

Genjo’s announcement prompted the following response by Rev. Nonin Chowaney of the Nebraska Zen Center:

This is unacceptable conduct. Genjo was not given the power to delete members from our list, so he has self-righteously overstepped his bounds. Can someone agree to take over our database, and if Genjo resigns from AZTA, that would be fine with me.

One could sympathize with the position held by both men in this exchange, one worried about sending people to a center so closely affiliated with Shimano (who the late Robert Aitken once referred to as “a crook”) and the other concerned about standing AZTA members having their listing removed without a formal process.

The case raises an interesting dilemma for the AZTA. The association presents itself on its website as a peer group, providing “an opportunity for expanded peer contacts and exchanges.” There is a membership committee in place for admitting individuals in to its membership, but there appears to be no mechanism in place for one’s removal — this due to the nature of the association itself (considering applicants based on their credentials alone). This results in what appears to be a lifetime membership. In all fairness, that process is under consideration (a process for grounds for removal).

At best, in this respect, when one sees that a Zen teacher is a member of the AZTA on their respective websites, it means that they have been recognized by their peers as another Zen teacher based on their credentials. Nothing more, nothing less. The membership appears unconcerned with matters of ethical breaches (as a body), with questions for prospective applicants revolving around matters of authorizations, length of time teaching, and length of time training. There are no questions regarding ethical issues, as there is no ethical statement on behalf of the AZTA itself.

As always, I’m afraid, it is “buyer beware” when entering the practice in a North American Zen center. Based on comments that have come in here at the website and elsewhere on the web, there are some individuals out there wholly willing to continue their practice with someone lax in their ethical judgment (Shimano being a more pronounced example of this).

As of today, there are no standardized ethical guidelines for the American Zen Teachers Association. Some centers have their own guidelines, with some being stronger than others. It has been pointed out to me since writing this article that the SZBA does require a member to have an ethics statement that meets certain criteria; I have requested a document which outlines that criteria, as it is not public. Burden therefore rests on the backs of those entering the practice to gauge the conduct of a prospective teacher. While taking responsibility for ourselves in this fashion is a good thing, and while we should be doing this with or without ethical guidelines or oversight in place, it is disconcerting that we ask those entering the practice, often at very difficult points in their own life, to be in a place where they are even interested in asking these very important questions.

We also have a situation here where individuals who might find more appropriate help in a mental health setting come knocking at the door of a center, instead. In some of these ethical breaches like that involving Shimano, it is alleged, these same people were those most vulnerable to his advances.

There are folks from both camps in this conversation regarding more standardized ethics for Zen teachers — those in favor, and those opposed, concerned that oversight would be heavy-handed. In my opinion, since there is this divide, the question for all of these practitioners might be, “Which option would result in the least harm?”

150 comments

“…one worried about sending people to a center so closely affiliated with Shimano (who the late Robert Aitken once referred to as “a crook”) and the other concerned about standing AZTA members having their listing removed without a formal process….”

-But Nonin has been so consistently wrong about everything, literally EVERYTHING having to do with Eido Shimano, that it makes me wonder how he can still open his mouth, even in outrage.
“Self-Righteous” indeed…

If Zenrin can be endorsed as a member of AZTA evidently based, in large part, on his recent dharma transmission from his teacher, Eido Shimano, the unethical sexual predator, then it would seem to follow that Eido Shimano deserves equal membership endorsement from Mr. Nonin, should Shimano seek it, or if Mr. Nonin, in his righteous wisdom, would be inclined to volunteer it. I think an AZTA sub-chapter consisting of Mr. Nonin, Shimano, and Zenrin could be established, sort of like a Tea Party, to advance their cause of ethical blindness. They could hold all-night debates (Shimano likey!) as the U.S. Congress is currently doing, to retard ethical progress or promote free sex (you can freak on me, but don’t tread on me!).

AZTA is irrelevant. Who needs it? It can’t do harm because it doesn’t really do anything. It could do *ethics*, but it won’t. It’s just a do-nothing fraternity with a few over-qualified members who try to push it forward, some sheep, and a few self-righteous plodding ones.

It’s a bit odd that one man gets to decide who gets on the list and who doesn’t. Isn’t that an exercise of absolute power? After Shimano and Sasaki, shouldn’t we be afraid of absolute power? If Genjo Marinello wants to clean up the database, why doesn’t he remove all of Sasaki’s oshos and the rest of Shimano’s dharma heirs? If Shimano was a fraud and that fraud gave Genjo Marinello dharma transmission, why doesn’t Genjo Marinello remove himself? I think the best thing to do at this point is get all of these guys off the list and be done with it. Enough of their ridiculous drama.

I wrote a message to Zenrin, a couple of weeks ago when I heard, offering him my heartfelt congratulations … and also saying that he should be ashamed of himself, and that the wider Sangha should turn their backs on him. Being a sexual predator is one thing … accepting Dharma Transmission from a sexual predator in a way that communicates support and tolerance of the sexual predator is a form of abetting and facilitating.

The “herd of cats” known as the AZTA is working on formulating a response. Some of us are trying to push them along. They are just so slow, fair and deliberate, trying to give everyone their say, that it is like watching paint dry. They truly are trying to do “the right thing” and address the situation justly and in keeping with the Precepts … and for that reason, they study and deliberate and “let everyone be heard” for weeks and months.

I do not support leaking conversations from the AZTA. It really puts the cabash on our ability to have open and free conversations over there, plus the quotes above from Nonin seem to have been taken out of context. On the other hand, like “Wikileaks” and the NSA … it does seem that it helps force people to finally take action.

But on the other hand, shame on all the fools who continue to take a handful of crooked Zen Teachers (their are really only a handful) and ignore the hundreds of sincere, honest, dedicated, committed folks who generally would not hurt a fly and give their all to help folks along this Path … trying to paint the whole bunch as a hoard of war mongering, sex crazed cheats and crooks. Some of these critics (some posting right in this discussion at SweepingZen), foolishly shortsighted or even with an axe to grind, are quick to assert that the whole Zen adventure is dangerous or corrupt based on isolated and extreme situations. Shame on you, for your actions are just as biased as those who would ignore, hide or explain away some of these scandals.

I don’t know how Jundo defines ”crooked”, but there has certainly been more than a handful of well-documented sexual scandals involving North American Zen teachers. So many, in fact, that it should be obvious that this is not a question of individual pathologies or isolated cults. Jundo’s hysterical rant against those challenging this naïve view (”Shame on all the fools …”) brings to mind Noam Chomsky’s words:

The system protects itself with indignation against a challenge to deceit in the service of power, and the very idea of subjecting the ideological system to rational inquiry elicits incomprehension or outrage, though it is often masked in other terms.

I disagree. Do not lump all these “well documented sexual scandals” as the same. I posted this over at the Facebook discussion ….

==================

Katagiri and Baker (and Maezumi and a couple of others) had consenting adult love affairs in the sexy 70’s that maybe they should not have had in hindsight because of the circumstances, but you cannot lump those two (and a few like them) into the category of sexual predators, date rapists and serial harrassers (which means largely Sasaki and Shimano … and that’s about all).

Brian Victoria points to a scattering of nationalistic Buddhists three quarters of a century ago (and prevaricates and makes up a load of his evidence even to do that http://sweepingzen.com/zen-war-author-brian-victorias…/. His latest escapade is trying to show that D.T.Suzuki was a Nazi sympathizer, a tar and feather job that I will review here in a few weeks).

Stuart Lachs makes some good points, but is “MR. EXTREME ASSERTION & TOO BROAD A BRUSH”. Lachs and Victoria are to the Zen world what Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly are to “fair and balanced” coverage of the OBama Administration (those two make some good points too, scattered amid all the bluster and hockum).

And if you know your history, the “Critical Buddhists” were focused on some obscure points of doctrine that had little to do with any of this.

Criticizing the Zen world because of a few folks like Sasaki and Shimano is a lot like criticizing most medical doctors because some are quacks, airline pilots because a handful fly drunk. Get real.

=======================

Teachers should generally refrain from sleeping with their students for reasons including potential power differentials, the need to keep the teacher-student relationship at arms length (literally), the fact that many students could be at vulnerable and susceptible points in their lives. Yes, it can be criticized. On the other hand, there is a vast difference between non-celibate grown adults having a sexual or romantic affair or three amid the open and free sexual atmosphere of 1960’s and 70’s California and sexual predators, date rapists and serial harassers who kept at it with dozens of students (often the weakest and most vulnerable) stretching over decades, some of which students were seriously damaged psychologically and spritually as a result (perhaps a few cases to the point of suicide). Sorry, these cases are not even in the same ballpark of wrongdoing.

The very idea of subjecting the ideological system to rational inquiry elicits incomprehension …

First of all, I wasn’t talking about ”a couple” of Zen teachers sleeping with their students during the ”sexy 70s”. There are, literally, dozens of more recent examples, and if you’re not aware of them, I suggest you do your homework before discussing this topic in public.

I also don’t understand why you bring up the work of Brian Victoria, Stuart Lachs, and the ”critical Buddhists” here. But if you think that Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirō focused on ”obscure points of doctrine” you obviously haven’t understood at all what their project was about.

But then, judging from other things you say here: Katagiri, Baker, Maezumi et al. had consenting love affairs ”that maybe they should not have had in hindsight” or ”Teachers should generally refrain from sleeping with their students” (italics added), you really haven’t understood much of anything. It’s very tempting to quote one of your Sōtō Zen colleagues here, but I’m afraid that would be seen as a violation of ”right speech”.

Are you saying that these “dozens” of teachers you mention are each and all “sexual predators, date rapists and serial harrassers”? Are you saying that more than a tiny number of supposed “teachers” (among all the sincere teachers) were “”sexual predators, date rapists and serial harrassers”? I hope not, because that would be a ridiculous assertion.

Are you saying that every (or even most) sexual or romantic relationships between teacher and student are to be lumped into one single bag of physical and psychological abuse, predation and manipulation? Are you saying that every affair between mature consenting adults is just the same as cases involving the targeting of the emotionally weak and vulnerable, manipulating some student into the bedroom as “part of training”? Are you saying that every student who comes to a Teacher is a weak and vulnerable individual incapable making his or her informed decision, standing on equal footing with the teacher? While I believe that relationships between teacher and student should be criticized and avoided because of the very real potential for abuse, I also recognize that sometimes … gosh oh gee … grown-ups fall in love or into bed, that in many cases both parties have the maturity to handle it and act from their free decisions, and that not every case is one of abuse, manipulation of the psychologically weak and inequality (I know one such pair who fell in love as people do, broke off the teacher-student relationship and have now been married for 20+ years). Nonetheless, as I wrote, “Teachers should generally refrain from sleeping with their students for reasons including potential power differentials, the need to keep the teacher-student relationship at arms length (literally), the fact that many students could be at vulnerable and susceptible points in their lives. Yes, it can be criticized.”

Looking at a window of the last 50 years of Zen in America, do you think that over 50 years and among hundreds of teachers, that some teachers and students falling into bed or love here and there is some flood of indecency. That is also foolish. I am sorry to tell you that, since the Buddha’s time … in India, China, Japan or Korea … among Buddhist clergy or Christian clergy or Jewish Rabbis … among psychologists or medical doctors or college professors or any number of folks with fiduciary or ethical duties to others … there have always been some folks who could not keep their nose clean. Does that mean that all Buddhists, Catholic Priests or Rabbis, every psychologist or doctor or professor is corrupt … that even among those who did fall into an affair, most of those are “sexual predators, date rapists and serial harrassers” as opposed to just folks who are are transgressing in lesser ways? I do not think you so foolish as to assert so.

Hi Jundo: Yes, it is true that any sexual relationship between clergy and congregant is considered an abuse of power, and an ethical violation. There are a lot of books and trainings out there about this topic, so I think you are in a very good position to update your ethics training and find out why most organizations/people feel this way.

I have had quite a bit of ethics training over the years in graduate school and in my various jobs. I’m also required to have yearly trainings. Because of this, my profession has few ethical violations, and the people who work in this field are fairly clear when a violation occurs. I have noticed in my 10 years doing zen that there has been little to no training on ethics, and people in my (highly regarded as ethical) center seem a bit fuzzy on the topic. This is in sharp contrast to my professional life, where individuals are quite fluent with ethical concepts.

So yes, I do think there have been an inordinate number of ethical violations by zen teachers. Lack of training and consequencing is likely why.

If you would like some free ethics training with a Zen focus, you can check out Chozen Bays series regarding clergy misconduct posted in 6 parts on Youtube. The recording quality is bad, but the content is excellent.

BTW, I think you are conflating “indecency” with ethical violations. An adult teacher and student sleeping together may not be indecent, but it is an ethical violation and an abuse of power. Someone picking their nose and scratching their crotch at a fancy dinner is indecent, but is not violating ethics.

– 1 – I support ethics training and standards that prevent sexual relationships between clergy and congregant. The potential for abuse is too great. Such relationships should be forbidden by organizations such as the AZTA and criticized because they result in some abuse or harm in most cases. All groups should have ethical standards forbidding such relationships (the San Francisco Zen Center, like our Sangha, currently has a rule forbidding teachers to form a sexual relationship with a former student within six months of the termination of the student-teacher relationship. http://www.sfzc.org/zc/display.asp?catid=1,5,13,136&pageid=33)

– 2 – That being said, are all cases like Shimano or Sasaki, involving true sexual predators, date rapists and serial harrassers who continued their malicious behavior over decades with dozens of students (often the weakest and most vulnerable), some of which students were seriously damaged psychologically and spiritually as a result (perhaps a few cases to the point of suicide)? NO. In fact, can you name another case like that of a mainstream Zen Teacher other than Shimano or Sasaki (and I am not talking about some pseudo-Zen cultists like “Zen Master Rama” or the like)?

– 3 – Do all cases involve immature, weak or psychologically vulnerable individuals incapable making their own informed decision, standing on equal footing with the teacher? Is every “teacher-student” relationship the same? NO. In some cases, do both adult parties have the maturity to handle the situation and act from their free decisions? YES. Should the teacher-student relationship be terminated in such cases nonetheless? YES. Should such relationships be criticized and generally forbidden nonetheless because of the potential for abuse. YES. Has every single sexual or romantic relationship been harmful to someone involved? NO.

– 4 – Over the last 50 years of Zen in America, and among hundreds of Zen teachers, are we talking about more than scattered cases? NO. Is it a situation much like airplane travel, in which millions of planes make safe landings each year, but the rare crash and burn gets all the headlines? YES. Does that mean we do not regulate and forbid dangerous behavior even if rare, just as we do in the airline industry even to avoid the rare crash? NO, we need standards. Did most of the scattered relationships that did occur in the Zen world (apart from Sasaki and Shimano) involved adult sexual relationships between teacher and student where there was unequal power or influence between the two, and possibly some very real psychological harm to the student, but not amounting to sexual predation, date rape or serial harrasment stretching over decades? YES. Should such individuals be criticized and punished nonetheless because they are harmful? YES. Is even one case of abuse tragic and to be prevented YES. But given the decades of Zen in America and hundreds of sincere Teachers who would generally not hurt a fly, is the whole bunch of hundreds of apples rotten because of scattered bad apples. NO.

Thank you for clarifying. If you are actively lobbying for the AZTA to adopt a set of ethical standards, then you are doing the American mahasangha a great service, and I commend you for it. And I also appreciate your frank and clear statement that abuse is never acceptable.

I too would like to clarify something, and also ask you to clarify something more. It appears to me from your comments here that you perceive the issue of sexual misconduct in zen to be the result of two disparate groups of people: serial, severely abusive, sexual predators (fortunately a very small group) and sincere, dedicated honest folks who sometimes make mistakes in their choice of bed partners. And that based on this view, it is annoying to you to hear people painting all of zen with a broad brush based on the bad actions of a very small number of people. Is this a correct statement of your view?

As a woman student, I don’t see the problem that way at all. For me, the issue is systemic. It’s not about the very bad contributions of a very few people, but about the unfortunate contributions of a large number of people caught in a system in which an average amount of courage, discernment, and fortitude are often not enough to recognize abusive behavior, stop it in a reasonable period of time, or support the people who have been victimized by it.

I could go on and on about the failures of various individuals- many of whom I have immense respect for- to be sufficiently open and forthright about the completely unacceptable behavior going on for years and years within their practice communities. But instead I’d like to offer a personal, and I’m guessing probably difficult, example.

I was raped, multiple times, when I was 10, by my father. I’ve been a practicing Buddhist for many years, but, not surprisingly, I have historically had some trust issues, and have not felt comfortable looking for a teacher. Now, after many years of therapy, I’ve come to a place of relative comfort with my past and stability in my present life- and I now feel ready for the first time to deepen my practice by working with a teacher.

I’m sure you can understand though, that it could be potentially devastating for my spiritual practice if 1) my teacher- even if he was a kind, decent individual, who was just making a stupid error- ended up hitting on me, or 2) in the unlikely event that I was not just hit on but actually assaulted by my teacher, senior members of the sangha were not willing to listen to my experience or take appropriate action.

I see the AZTA has a large list of teachers who I could potentially work with. Given those two criteria, can you tell me here, in a public forum, who among them I should avoid?

If you don’t feel comfortable doing so- and I can absolutely 100% understand and empathize with how that could be the case- then that is my example. I feel confident from having read many of your posts that you’re a kind, decent, upstanding human being. But I suspect it would involve a great deal of sacrifice on your part to offer this very minimal amount of protection to potentially vulnerable women students- I think you would have to burn bridges, correct? So there it is, the problem from my perspective- not a few bad apples; a wonderful but also tragically imperfect system with a big problem that no one knows how to solve.

First, I believe that no teacher should “hit on” anyone, make a pass at, engage in sexual banter with, let alone “assault”. It is totally unacceptable for a Teacher to do so, especially with someone who may even arguably be a student. That is so even in the case that the Teacher has no idea of your particular background. All Buddhist Teachers should assume that all people who come to Practice are potentially in a sensitive or vulnerable psychological state of some kind, even if they do not know for sure. Period.

That being said, I believe that there is something of a “sliding scale” of sex scandals that have occurred, and they are not all the same. On one extreme, you have predators who have knowingly taken advantage of obviously vulnerable individuals with unwelcome sexual advances and lures such as implying that sex would be part of their “spiritual training”, engaged in physical assaults or the like repeatedly with multiple victims over years. I believe we are talking about a tiny number (likely two) of well known cases.

At the other extreme are teachers who simply fell in love or a sexual relationship with someone who, arguably a student for a short time , was a mature adult who (unlike you) did not prove to have any psychological vulnerability and was fully independent and competent in entering into the relationship. In such cases, the Teacher would have immediately broken off any hint of a “Teacher-Student” relationship. (Nonetheless, as I stated, such cases should still be criticized, and perhaps punished in some way by the Teacher’s Sangha, because of the appearance or possibility of harm to the student even if there actually was no harm. Even so, such a case is not the same as the predator).

Most cases are likely on some sliding scale between, where there are varying amounts of psychological vulnerability and dependence, use of the unequal power and influence of the Teacher as Teacher and the like. None of these cases are acceptable, although these too are not all equal.

I also agree with you that the community of followers of these Teachers have often, actively or passively aided and enabled some of this Teacher behavior in ways ranging from true “cult-like” rationalization and psychophantic behavior (especially true in the case of the two worst cases I mentioned above) to simply being in some state of denial or ambivalence. That is unacceptable too.

However, all that being said, and even though even one case of harm is inexcusable: These cases are still very rare. The fact that the “scandals” get headlines while “nothing happening” gets no attention means that the scandals jump out (nobody notices all the planes that land safely). I would not worry about going to a Zen Teacher and having an unwelcome sexual encounter because it is very unlikely (the same way I do not worry about getting on an airplane even though some few pilots drink and fly, and some will crash). To make doubly sure, check out the person’s reputation by searching on the internet, asking around. I very much doubt you would have anything to worry about, any more than you have to worry about encountering a medical doctor, college professor or psychologist who would take advantage. They exist, but it is rare.

I respectfully and emphatically do not agree that there is real or viable consent to sexual contact between clergy and congregant, regardless of the situation. This is according to ethical thinking of organizations who guide clergy ethical behavior, like the Faith Trust Institute.

My own experience with the several dozen male teachers who I’ve known informally over the last fifty years of my involvement as a peripheral character on the Zen scene, is that at least half of them have had affairs with students. Of those who do about half are married at the time. In the cases where the student was married, as with Baker’s final fiasco, it was the cause of a lot of pain and much harm. Of course this is a small sampling, and I might know the more unorthodox types, (I’m in California) but I suspect an actual scientific survey would yield similar results. The situation in Japan might be quite different — I’m not familiar with what goes on there.

So, until the Zen establishment here (such as it is) can manage to enforce ethical guidelines regarding teacher/student relationships, my advice to women students is — if you feel vulnerable in this regard, seek out a female Zen teacher — fortunately there are now many very good ones.

But most women I know can handle themselves fine in such situations. We’re not talking about rapists here, just ordinary male behavior. But don’t ever forget that they are ordinary men. While they might understand some things and get a lot of respect, they are frequently far from perfect.

I cannot speak for Zen teachers or Californians ( although I lived there as a child). I am not a spokesman for men, but I am a typical male and have observed typical males for many years. The sexual abusers we are talking about here and the adulters you refer to are not indulging in “ordinary male behavoir.” I do agree that people in general are far from perfect.

After I posted that I knew someone would call me on the term “ordinary.” They’re what Jundo referred to earlier as “consenting adult love affairs” rather than “sexual abuse.” He mentions Katagiri, Baker and Maezumi, who I believe were all married, and who’s affairs sound as if they were pretty destructive all around.

I am glad to know I’m not the only male who can resist the temptation to jump into bed with every female that presents herself.

Jundo, I am sorry I think I was a bit snarky in my previous post. Like anon I think you are sincere and a good person, from what I have seen here on Sweeping Zen.

I don’t believe there are a lot like Sasaki or Shimano, and I don’t think this is being suggested. I don’t think anyone is suggesting that Zen is harmful or invalid because of these two men.

Concerning your asserting that there is a difference between predators and nice people who make mistakes, I actually don’t believe that matters much. If someone is harmed, does it matter the harm comes from a serial predator, or a “nice guy/gal who makes a mistake”? We must take unintentional/uninformed harm seriously too.

Anon brings up some great points. In my profession, because of my role I must be more than normal human nice and careful. I have to stay aware and trained in ethics because I’m in a position to do harm using only normal human nice thinking. Whether or not I will cause harm in my role is not always easy to feel my way through. Luckily, I have a professional code of conduct to guide me, required training to keep me focused, a regulating board to communicate with the world my standing, and a way to file complaints when things go wrong with me or my colleagues. All this feels quite supportive to me, and keeps me and the people I work with safe. Physicians, lawyers, psychologists, massage therapists, morticians etc. have this. I think they are just as important and powerful in people’s lives as Zen teachers. You must too.

If Anon came to me requesting a referral to someone in my field, I would have a place to look up people in good standing, a number to call to see if there have been complaints filed, a code of ethics to compare her experience, an avenue to file a complaint, and an empowered organization that could investigate claims. You can see Zen doesn’t have these resources, and surely you can see that because of this, people (teachers and students) are at risk of harm of causing harm, and have little means to prevent future harm.
With respect

For purposes of ethical standards such as those by the Faith Trust Institute, we should NEVER assume that there are situations of real consent between clergy and congruent. All should be prohibited.

On the other hand, the realities of the situation are that not all sexual contact between clergy and congruent is the same, and in some specific circumstance and real cases there may be no harm or little harm. I would compare the situation to “drunk driving”. In Japan, where I live, driving with a level alcohol in one’s blood equal to a single glass of wine will result in a penalties of various kinds, including arrest. It should. The potential harms caused by DUI are too serious. However, the fact of the matter is that there is a real difference between the “predator” who drives dead drunk down the highway after drinking a nightly pint of whiskey and the grandmother who drives home one time on a Sunday after forgetfully drinking a glass of wine at her daughters wedding. Furthermore, some drivers can finish a six-pack and show no measurable physical effect, and most folks will get home safely on most days anyway. Nonetheless, we ban drinking across the board because the potential for harm his too great. Period.

In some cases, there are mature adults, mentally strong, informed and independent minded and who are not spiritually or psychologically vulnerable who happen to fall in love or fall into bed because, well, that is what sometimes happens to people. Nobody is harmed in the actual situation, and in fact, such people may believe that they were greatly benefited from the relationship (like my friends who have now been married for 20+ years). Nonetheless, relationships between clergy and congregant should be banned. As in the cases of DUI, penalties should vary according to the situation: from simply apologizing and agreeing to halt the “teacher-student” relationship from that point forward, to being kicked out of one’s congregation permanently or for an extended time (the equivalent of a license suspension), to wide-spread derision and banning from the community, to legal action for assault (the equivalent of the repeat offender truck driver who finally hurts or kills someone).

Drunk driving, unfortunately, is not rare. But whatever the case, looking at the 50 year history of Zen Buddhism in America, hundreds of Teachers, romantic and sexual relationships between Teachers and Students have happened from time to time, but are scattered and rare. Cases of serious predation involving serial abuse of known vulnerable students are extremely rare even if grabbing headlines (as they should) and deserving the strongest penalties.

We do not have a central agency that one can go to and “check up on” a Teacher before attending. It would be hard to make one, given the diffuse way in which the wider Buddhist world is organized. However, we have something better: The internet makes hiding facts difficult. Furthermore, people who have complaints about specific teachers tell their story publicly on their blogs, and sometimes (as in the case of Genpo Merzel) a group of Teachers widely publicizes their criticism of the individual (he kept teaching by the way, but the information is now publicly available http://shambhalasun.com/news/?p=20366). An organization like the AZTA removes the person from their rolls as an approved Teacher (this is now what is happening in the case of Zenrin, the person who accepted Dharma Transmission from Eido Shimano that is the topic of the thread). In the worst cases, someone like Kobutsu Malone gathers a “Shimano Archives” http://www.shimanoarchive.com/ and someone like Adam at SweepingZen makes sure the information gets publicized from time to time. Organizations like Faith Trust make themselves available to help victims. Congregations (hopefully, because it is up to each one) kick the scoundrels out.

I am afraid that we actually do a BETTER job in the Zen world than the medical establishment does with bad physicians. Do you know how hard it is to actually find out the detail of claims for malpractice again a medical doctor, let alone get a license suspended?

What is more, I believe that many in the Zen world have learned some lessons, and are more willing to speak out about situations with Teachers and Sangha than in the past.

Nonetheless, the cases of all kinds are still rare, are found in all professions. Even though some college professors have relationships with students (and even though a tinier number may be truly sick individuals who slipped through the cracks of the system), do we fear going to college? Are most of the college teachers anything like that? Of course not.

Hi again Jundo: I think I don’t disagree with much you say about harm etc. I do disagree when you state that Zen has few examples of sexual misconduct, and that the current system works better than the medical system (for example) to protect people.
I think the problem is that we are talking apples and oranges here. I’m talking about how a lack of an agreed on code of ethics enables ethical violations. I believe you are talking about morals and harm, and also feeling defensive about people perhaps thinking there is something wrong with Zen. I don’t think anyone is saying Zen is bad for you. I do think Zen could be safer and better with an agreed on code of ethics.
Ethics are externally focused and socially sanctioned – they are guidelines often for a group or a profession. Morals are internal and personal. It is very hard to proscribe behavior when there are no clear ethical guidelines. You cannot stop bad professional behavior with your good and clear morals alone– look at the people of ZSS and Rinzai-Ji who tried that. Also, in the matter of your friend, I don’t dispute that all turned out well with his relationship (I’m assuming a he ). I do not judge your friend in how he has resolved this; I’m in no place to do that. I do wonder at his understanding of his role and the potential negative outcome of his conduct. With internalized ethical thinking, anyone can actually take steps to prevent “falling in love and in bed” with people who it would be inappropriate to do so with. I’ve felt intimate and attracted to lots of people – when it’s inappropriate, I stop that process of “falling in love and in bed” quite easily and quickly. I don’t think it’s just “something that happens” that can’t be controlled. What one slip, even with a good outcome, says to me is that a person wasn’t able to put their ethical obligations and the sanctity of their role before their needs.
I do know from experience that if a boundary is crossed once, and the person wasn’t able to put their obligations before their needs, and also wasn’t soundly repudiated for this violation, it is likely going to be easy for them to cross again.

I don’t think anyone is saying Zen is bad for you. I do think Zen could be safer and better with an agreed on code of ethics.
Ethics are externally focused and socially sanctioned – they are guidelines often for a group or a profession.

The problem is that, even if you had an agreed code of ethics, there is no board or organization with power to enforce it. Let me explain.

The SZBA has a Statement of Ethics for its Soto members (http://szba.org/wp-content/uploads/SZBA_Ethics_Statement_Sept_2011.pdf), and asks all its member Sangha to have ethics policies in place (we do at Treeleaf). Of course, the SZBA is only Soto folks … and not even all of those! Moreover … there is nothing from keeping any Zen Priest from just ignoring or dropping out of the SZBA! This is pretty much what happened with Genpo Merzel, as I understand, who basically said at some point “bye bye and to Buddha-hell with you” and went on his merry way.

The AZTA is even more disorganized, and is just really a social organization for people from a variety of Zen Traditions … Rinzai, Soto, Korean Son, Chan, Thien … to talk to each other and communicate. To become a member, one must show the following (http://www.americanzenteachers.org/membership.html). In was never a regulatory body, nor could it be (again, because of the “bye bye and to Buddha-hell with you” voluntary nature of the group). They should have a basic “Code of Conduct” too, and a requirement that members Sangha each have one too … but they will never have power to ban people as Zen Teachers for non-compliance. They are not the “Bar Association” with some government power to disbar a bad lawyer.

In the case of Zenrin Lewis, the most they might be able to do is kick him out of the AZTA or de-list his name from the list of member Teachers. They cannot stop him from Teaching.

What is more, until very recently, each line of Zen and Sangha was very independent. So, for example, suppose the Sasaki Line is acting very “culty”, protecting it’s Teacher, covering things up, refusing to take action to clean up its own house. What could Teachers from other Lines do except jump up and down from outside? There was little power that people from one house had over anyone else … even their own Brother and Sisters in their own Line. The power of the pen has been about it.

Of course, threads like this very one on the Internet, other Zen folks writing blogs and letters of protest and the like at least do get the information out on the Internet. Maybe the “sunshine” of the internet is the most effective disinfectant possible.

I do believe that many folks tended to take a “see no evil, hear no evil” attitude about what was going on in other Sangha. This has changed very much the last few years. However, there still is no central regulatory body for Zen Priests and we still live in a “bye bye and thanks for the fish” world where anyone kicked out of one organization or church can just go set up their own organization or church down the street.

Jundo,
I don’t know if you suffer from some kind of reading disability, if you’re trolling, or if you’re just plain stupid but this repeated litany of red herrings and straw men makes it clear that there is absolutely no point in continuing this discussion.

I don’t perceive Jundo as any of those things Tutte… Since he has made himself clear to no avail, why don’t you state what it is you seem to WANT him to say.

(Checked out your website btw… let me just say, if it is a SERIOUS site, then you are full of crap – Ayn Rand, Libertarianism, Objectivisim are perfect examples of anti-Buddhism… they are diametrically opposed.
If it however is a parody site… well played;) )

“Like Shakyamuni Buddha, Tutteji was born into the very highest nobility, the Wachtmeister family being one of the oldest families of the Swedish aristocracy. At an early age, Tutte had a series of profound spiritual experiences. Returning home to the family mansion after his first day in school, he met an old man. The following day he met a group of shoppers, carrying their stuffed bags home after a day at the mall. Not having encountered old age or the boredom of being a low-level consumer, he was naturally deeply shocked. On the third day, however, Tutte came upon a possible way of finding a way of escaping what seemed an empty and meaningless existence. He met a successfull entrepeneur: one who had devoted his life to serving the Free Market. Enjoying all the pleasures of life, this man radiated a calmness and confidence that suggested to young Tutte that he had somehow come to terms with the unpleasant facts of modern life.”

Shodo:
Jundo’s claim that inappropriate relations between Zen teachers and their students are rare exceptions that could be explained by the ”open and free sexual atmosphere of 1960′s and 70′s California” is patently false. As I said in my first comment, there are numerous recent and well-known examples (beside those mentioned in this thread). Either Jundo is not aware of these cases (which I find hard to believe) or he’s simply trying to whitewash the image of his profession. Also note his insidious formulation: ”Teachers should generally refrain from sleeping with their students”. When challenged on these points, he responded with a long rant, focusing on the difference between different kinds of sexual abuse, and suggesting that ”mature” and ”mentally strong” students could have “beneficial” sexual relationships with their teachers, topics which are irrelevant for this discussion.

Anon and Winterrobin make several good points in their comments. For better or worse, I don’t have their patience dealing with this kind of bullshit.

And, yes, my blog is mostly parody and satire (with the occassional ”serious” discussion). That this isn’t obvious to people like Spike (Or Jundo himself) is actually quite frightening. Like one reader said, “It’s like reading The Onion and thinking, ‘Man, this is actually not as bad as reality.'”

Hell, had I known beforehand how easily duped is the audience for this kind of crap, I could’ve made tons of money (not to mention how many young chicks that could have benefited from my compassionate services).

Using a bio pic of a body double for bubba clinton is perfect! But what a curse for the poor guy to have that in common!

Oh, haha, you got *spiked* , and it wasn’t even intended. Perfect. Talk about justice.

Most people here probably work for a living. Just think what someone else could have accomplished with the time Mr. Pink tutu spends constructing and maintaining his blog. At least could have done zazen instead.

P.S. Should update his dharma transmissions from clear moon, misty moon, etc., to include playful moon.

P.P.S. the transmission bullshit between Mr. Bubba to sfzc and zcla are an insult to those two organizations and should be removed.

P.P.P.S. Yep, that’s a lot of peepees. Now I know what haystyack Kobutus’s dogs could go in.

Thank you for your kind, empathetic reply and further clarification. The “sliding scale” model you mention is how I also see sexual contact between teachers and students. And I agree with you too that in some cases harm may be minimal or nonexistent, and that both partners may in some cases approach the relationship with clear eyes despite the power differential.

And I would even go so far as to say that if we are truly committed to honoring the perspective of the student, then we have to admit that sometimes teacher-student sex may end up being beneficial for some individual students, not only in the few cases where mature, long-lasting relationships result, but even in the cases where the “sex” is what I (and the law) would label “assault”- even some of Sasaki’s students have felt this way about their sexual contact with him.

I think your analogy to drunk driving is a good one, and I essentially have nothing to add there.

I have to say though, that I think you are mistaken in your belief that few teachers have sexual contact with their students. I do not know of any recent studies specific to Buddhism, but in Jack Kornfield’s (admittedly small) study during the 1980s, of 54 Buddhist teachers, 15 were celibate. Of the other 39, 34 had “occasional” sex with students. And among studies of clergy from a variety of religious denominations, rates of clergy admitting to sexual contact with congregants generally range between 5-20% (and sometimes significantly higher), while clergy who say they personally know another clergy member who has had sex with congregants seem to generally be in the 50-70% range.

I especially want to respond though, to this part of your comment:

> I also agree with you that the community of
> followers of these Teachers have often,
> actively or passively aided and enabled some of
> this Teacher behavior”

It is not just the communities of followers of specific teachers, although for sure, in all of the largest scandals, that has been a big part of it. But an equally large part, imo, is the passive enabling behavior of those teachers’ peers, and often their “superiors” too. See, for example, Sasaki, Merzel, and Shimano’s teachers’ responses, the initial not-sufficient response of Aitken-roshi (who I greatly respect) to Shimano, and then the later responses of some of Atkin’s peers to what was essentially Atkin’s deathbed correction of his initial lack of fortitude about Shimano. Or for another example, the entries for Shimano and Sasaki in “Zen Master Who”, about which James Ford (who I greatly respect) now rightly says “no doubt I could have done better”.

And this extends not just to the worst cases, but also (perhaps moreso) to the teachers in the middle of the sliding scale who have only harmed a few students, rather than scores. A sad but glaring example here is also Ford’s “Zen Master Who”, which mentions most of the well known cases of teacher misconduct, but remains completely silent about his own teacher, who has also had multiple sexual relationships with students.

I think AZTA is a great example of the complexity of the problem. I absolutely think that your (AZTA’s) open letters had an important and positive effect on Sasaki, Merzel, and Shimano finally being cast aside by their communities. And if you remove abusive teachers from your rolls of approved teachers, that is wonderful and important too (although it appears to me that this is not actually something you have a set policy on yet, is it?)

But it also appears to me that in general AZTA only acts when things have been exceptionally terrible, generally for decades, and/or when you are pushed to do so by public disclosure. This, in general, seems to me to be the model of public sanction of harmful behavior in Japan, and I think we have inherited this model in zen. And it is not helpful for us.

This is why I brought up my own situation. It is (at least comparatively) easy to condemn the behavior of a few very bad apples. But the problem is a systemic one that we all participate in to one extent or another, and- I hope without being blaming and without minimizing the things it does for the good- I want to show you your own organization’s participation.

> I would not worry about going to a Zen Teacher and
> having an unwelcome sexual encounter

This is not exactly what I asked you. What I asked you is if, given my history, there are any AZTA teachers I should avoid. And if I take this response to mean that you would feel okay about me going to any AZTA teacher, then you are contributing (unwittingly and with only good intent, I am sure) to the problem (but perhaps you misunderstood that I was asking not only about teachers who I could expect from past behavior could potentially be sexually inappropriate with me but also about those whose communities would be likely to be unsupportive of reports of sexual misconduct).

I don’t know much about most of the teachers on the list, but of those whose public behavior I’ve witnessed, it’s completely obvious, for example, that I shouldn’t be a student of John Tarrant (who has been having sexual relationships with students for decades and who becomes angry and dismissive when asked by students about it) or with Nonin Chowaney (who has engaged basically in public character assassination of several people who he has disagreed with about sexual misconduct [in every case of which I’m aware, he also later proved to be factually in the wrong]).

And I know for sure that there are former senior students of Sasaki, at least some of whom are now teachers, that still think his assaultive/abusive behavior was beneficial- but I don’t know which students those are. Are any of them AZTA teachers? If so (and maybe even if not), I bet the AZTA rumor mill knows. But I also expect AZTA members would feel it was inappropriate to share that knowledge publicly. And I can completely empathize with that, and even see some merit in it. Nevertheless, the end result is that potential students don’t have access to knowledge that the peer community of teachers does have about teachers who condone (or engage in) misconduct or abuse. And that makes any subsequent misconduct/ abuse partly the responsibility of that community of peers.

I don’t actually expect you to reply by agreeing with me about specific teachers or by naming names of others who you might personally know have an iffy relationship to misconduct. I recognize that the karma of the whole community is such that for the most part only those who already feel their bridges have been burned can be reasonably expected to do that. But what I do expect is acknowledgement that silence in the face of knowledge of abuse is a contributing factor in that abuse, and it’s not something that some group of other people do- it’s something that the zen community has been doing together for a long time and continues to do in the present (although thankfully it is starting to be to a lesser extent).

Thank you for taking the time to engage with my long and perhaps not optimally stated thoughts.

I agree that the AZTA and teachers privy to reliable information about an abusive situation were too slow to speak out. For sure. People had too much of a tendency to tend to their own houses, and ignore what was happening in the house down the street or across the country. This is changing, in large part because it has become apparent that this resulted in certain egregious situations (Sasaki, Shimano) dragging on for decades. Also, over recent years the power of the internet has meant that, for the first time, we can have real conversations and share information like this. How could you have, for example, the “Shimano Archives” without it?

If you ask me to tell you the names of any teachers I have “first hand knowledge about” … there are none. I can repeat things I have heard, rumors posted by anonymous people on the internet, whispers. It is only in very clear cases (where the evidence mounts up, such as in the case of the “Shimano Archives”) that I feel confident about speaking out from the other side of the world. If I had real knowledge of a harmful situation, I would say and speak out. However, I also know of several cases where some angry or disturbed individuals made FALSE accusation of sexual harassment and “date rape” against some individuals, so I also hesitate to spread “I heard someone say that they heard” rumors.

You know, there is that old story about Hakuin about the village girl who falsely says Hakuin was the father of her baby because she is ashamed to admit it was some other fellow. Hakuin just raises the baby and says “Is that so?” to the accusations. (Me, I would demand a paternity test … but they did not have that back then). I think we just need to be careful of spreading rumors and unconfirmed, second hand information too.

Gassho, Jundo

P.S. – This is another reason that Adam here at SweepingZen is to be commended. Do you he has even gone ahead and published information in the face of threatening letters from the lawyers of the alleged wrongdoer?

given the decades of Zen in America and hundreds of sincere Teachers who would generally not hurt a fly, is the whole bunch of hundreds of apples rotten because of scattered bad apples.
– Jundo

Ordinary people generally do hurt flies, and you seem to be arguing that Zen teachers are ordinary people, which indeed they are. Also, for any sort of people, a few mutant cells, out of billions of cells, can kill people.

Religion is about meaning, essentially, and a loss of meaning is something that a religion can’t afford, particularly such a very unpopular religion. For that reason it’s understandable that many devoted to Zen would want to hide the truth, or try to frame the truth in a way that doesn’t seem so bad. That’s a shame, because the only way to gain meaning is to do something meaningful.

Aphorisms like the one with the rotten apples get nowhere near the problem. One symptom of the problem is that since 1982, since Nakagawa shunned Shimano once and for all, since the scandal then, which was very well documented THEN – since 1982 American Zen has no solution – not even the least clue of a solution – for what in other professions is called “professional misconduct”.

Zen has no notion anywhere near the solution. I mean you have no notion, neither about the problem nor about any kind of solution! What you Zen people think we in our culture here mean by “integrity”? Such a notion is fully absent from any discussion you undertake. Why? Because you think in terms like the “true dharma eye” and such things.

You are living isolation – isolation from a culture which provides plenty of input for your problems.

What you Zen people think we in our culture here mean by “integrity”? Such a notion is fully absent from any discussion you undertake. Why? Because you think in terms like the “true dharma eye” and such things.

Zen Practice is about “intergrity” and “living by Vow and the Precepts”. Hundreds of Zen Teachers I know (and who get not attention for doing so) live such way, while some bad apples forget their Vows and the Precepts (and get all the attention). Even one case is a tragedy, but the result is that relatively scattered and rare events appear to be disproportionately wide-spread end endemic to the system.

Let me repeat some of what I pointed out below (sorry for the repeat), because this thread is one heck of a tangle of conversations!

==================

We still do not have a solution in the Zen world for “professional misconduct” and I doubt we ever will. Why?

The problem is that, even if you had an agreed code of ethics, there is no board or organization with power to enforce it. Let me explain.

The SZBA has a Statement of Ethics for its Soto members (http://szba.org/wp-content/uploads/SZBA_Ethics_Statement_Sept_2011.pdf), and asks all its member Sangha to have ethics policies in place (we do at Treeleaf). Of course, the SZBA is only Soto folks … and not even all of those! Moreover … there is nothing from keeping any Zen Priest from just ignoring or dropping out of the SZBA! This is pretty much what happened with Genpo Merzel, as I understand, who basically said at some point “bye bye and to Buddha-hell with you” and went on his merry way.

The AZTA is even more disorganized, and is just really a social organization for people from a variety of Zen Traditions … Rinzai, Soto, Korean Son, Chan, Thien … to talk to each other and communicate. To become a member, one must show the following (http://www.americanzenteachers.org/membership.html). In was never a regulatory body, nor could it be (again, because of the “bye bye and to Buddha-hell with you” voluntary nature of the group). They should have a basic “Code of Conduct” too, and a requirement that members Sangha each have one too … but they will never have power to ban people as Zen Teachers for non-compliance. They are not the “Bar Association” with some government power to disbar a bad lawyer.

In the case of Zenrin Lewis, the most they might be able to do is kick him out of the AZTA or de-list his name from the list of member Teachers. They cannot stop him from Teaching.

What is more, until very recently, each line of Zen and Sangha was very independent. So, for example, suppose the Sasaki Line is acting very “culty”, protecting it’s Teacher, covering things up, refusing to take action to clean up its own house. What could Teachers from other Lines do except jump up and down from outside? There was little power that people from one house had over anyone else … even their own Brother and Sisters in their own Line. The power of the pen has been about it.

Of course, threads like this very one on the Internet, other Zen folks writing blogs and letters of protest and the like at least do get the information out on the Internet. Maybe the “sunshine” of the internet is the most effective disinfectant possible.

I do believe that many folks tended to take a “see no evil, hear no evil” attitude about what was going on in other Sangha. This has changed very much the last few years. However, there still is no central regulatory body for Zen Priests and we still live in a “bye bye and thanks for the fish” world where anyone kicked out of one organization or church can just go set up their own organization or church down the street.

=====================

I agree that the AZTA and teachers privy to reliable information about an abusive situation were too slow to speak out. For sure. People had too much of a tendency to tend to their own houses, and ignore what was happening in the house down the street or across the country. This is changing, in large part because it has become apparent that this resulted in certain egregious situations (Sasaki, Shimano) dragging on for decades. Also, over recent years the power of the internet has meant that, for the first time, we can have real conversations and share information like this. How could you have, for example, the “Shimano Archives” without it?

If you ask me to tell you the names of any teachers I have “first hand knowledge about” … there are none. I can repeat things I have heard, rumors posted by anonymous people on the internet, whispers. It is only in very clear cases (where the evidence mounts up, such as in the case of the “Shimano Archives”) that I feel confident about speaking out from the other side of the world. If I had real knowledge of a harmful situation, I would say and speak out. However, I also know of several cases where some angry or disturbed individuals made FALSE accusation of sexual harassment and “date rape” against some individuals, so I also hesitate to spread “I heard someone say that they heard” rumors.

You know, there is that old story about Hakuin about the village girl who falsely says Hakuin was the father of her baby because she is ashamed to admit it was some other fellow. Hakuin just raises the baby and says “Is that so?” to the accusations. (Me, I would demand a paternity test … but they did not have that back then). I think we just need to be careful of spreading rumors and unconfirmed, second hand information too.

Gassho, Jundo

P.S. – This is another reason that Adam here at SweepingZen is to be commended. Do you know he has even gone ahead and published information in the face of threatening letters from the lawyers of the alleged wrongdoer?

Thanks for pasting your reply up here- the thread is getting so long & confusing!

> You know, there is that old story about Hakuin about the village girl
> who falsely says Hakuin was the father of her baby

The dharma is indeed vast and subtle- I was just thinking of that very story myself! Except I have always interpreted it not as a teaching about not spreading rumors, but as a teaching about absorbing inappropriate blame with equanimity in order to benefit others. From my understanding, asking for a paternity test would be directly antithetical to the entire point of the story.

> If you ask me to tell you the names of any teachers I have “first hand knowledge about” … there are none

In regards to first-hand knowledge of actual sexual misconduct, clearly that is going to be a very small sample size, since you’re a dude, so the number of teachers who might have hit on you and then also want to hit on me is going to be extremely limited.

I’m aware that sounds flip, but I’m making a serious point, which is that for men to be helpful in stopping sexual harassment and abuse of women, for the most part, they have to be willing to make the jump to accepting some amount of secondhand information. How helpful one can be depends on how clearly and carefully one has thought about the issue of what circumstances justify making that jump. Obviously, there will be some instances where it will be perfectly clear that relying on secondhand information is not a good idea (for example, when the account contains large factual impossibilities). And there will be some cases where it will be perfectly obvious that relying on secondhand information is a moral imperative (for example, once the Shimano Archives went up).

But in most cases, one is forced to evaluate secondhand information and then make a choice. In general, one can protect the teacher who may or may not have committed misconduct, or one can protect the students who may or may not have been hurt in the past, present and future. It is usually not possible to do both.

Therefore one must decide how much information is enough to tip the balance from protecting the teacher to protecting the students. If there is one report, maybe it is not our place to expect the teacher to be as worthy as Hakuin. Are three reports enough? Five? What if the teacher has admitted one instance, and now there are other instances he denies?

No one can know with certainty exactly where the balance should tip. To wait for the level of information provided by the Shimano archive though; that involves waiting for a lot of lives to be destroyed.

Therefore I ask you, before making such decisions in the future, to please consider carefully the relative potential for damage from each choice. If you feel you must choose protection of the reputation of the teacher until there is evidence at the level of the Shimano Archive, then I am telling you clearly here, in case you have not been able to confront this inside yourself in the past, that you are facilitating the victimization of students.

> I can repeat things I have heard, rumors posted by anonymous people on the internet, whispers

Only you can judge when repeating these things would be right action and when it would be wrong action. Just please don’t think that *not* repeating them insulates you from responsibility. I beg to urge you, life and death are a grave matter, all things pass quickly away. Don’t be Robert Aitken and face the end of your life regretting the damage you’ve done with your silence.

….

My sincere wishes that you, I, and all beings may come to be happy, healthy and at peace.

Thank you for trying to help Jundo see his role in re-victmization more clarity. You state it succinctly here:

“If you feel you must choose protection of the reputation of the teacher until there is evidence at the level of the Shimano Archive, then I am telling you clearly here, in case you have not been able to confront this inside yourself in the past, that you are facilitating the victimization of students.”

Withholding judgment of teachers can be an insidious way of siding with the more powerful.

Thank you for trying to help Jundo see his role in re-victmization more clearly. You state it succinctly here:

“If you feel you must choose protection of the reputation of the teacher until there is evidence at the level of the Shimano Archive, then I am telling you clearly here, in case you have not been able to confront this inside yourself in the past, that you are facilitating the victimization of students.”

Withholding judgment of teachers can be an insidious way of siding with the more powerful.

No, I do not think it a good idea to just go spreading overheard rumors. That can create victims of a different sort.

However, what we perhaps should have is some place or mechanism where women (and men) with complaints can go to make or publicize their complaints (semi-anonymously to protect their privacy, yet with enough accountability that there is some record of who is making the complaint) to someone who can investigate a complaint or rumor. The committee or body might then be able to report publicly that the complaint has a basis or no basis.

The problem is that most Sangha have been very autonomous, not open to outsiders poking their noses around. This is what happened in the Sasaki and Shimano situations. Victims also were hesitant to come forth (even if one reads the Sasaki and Shimano archives, there are surprisingly few victims who were willing to come forward in the first person and make a public complaint … and that was in the two most egregious cases). Even if a body like “Faith Trust” offers to go in to resolve the problem, the help is often refused or people are hesitant to open up.

Frankly, if the victims of abuse are not ready to raise a stink, make a loud noise and point fingers, it is often very hard for outsiders to find out “the facts”. That was true in the Shimano and Sasaki cases, and the problem of information gathering is even more serious in cases of sexual harassment where it can come down to a “he said, she said” situation. I understand the hesitancy of the victims and the pressure they may feel, but the best course is for the victims to make a loud and public noise.

For example, if one victim in the Sasaki case had made a loud and persistent noise for years about what happened, it might still have been easy for Sasaki and his students to deny as “he said/she said”. But if three or five victims and … loudly and consistently … make loud and persistent complaints about Sasaki and not let it go … it would have been more obvious and earlier. The victims tend to be too quiet, even if their reasons for doing so are understandable. It was only when Kobutsu Malone made public the papers that Robert Aitken had kept hidden for years that many of us first heard anything of the situation with Shimano.

I know of two cases, and will not “name the names” because to do so will only perpetuate the rumor. One involved a Zen Teacher in America and a claim made by a disturbed individual who appeared to have a history of doing so with many many older men in her life, and another case in Japan of a woman who seemed to be some kind of “priest groopie” and tried to seduce several of the young priests during a Sesshin at a Japanese monastery while I was attending. Apart from the Zen world, I have personal knowledge of male friends who experienced, in one case, a sexual harassment claim by another man that appears to have been related to anger for not getting a promotion, and another case of a friend who was told that he was responsible for a pregnancy that was not his (the motive was money, since the woman made the same claim to two other men at the time).

One wrong does not excuse another, and we have to tread carefully in all these cases.

And to WinterRobin below …

I do agree that Zen Teachers have been too quiet in protesting cases of abuse. Their has been a tendency to look first at what is happening within one’s own house, and not in the house down the street. This is bad. It is wrong.

The AZTA should have a Code of Ethics for its members and require its members to have one in place (just as the SZBA has had for a long time). One the other hand, I believe that it will never be possible to set up some kind of “regulatory committee or board” for the simple reason that the “trouble makers” and their Sangha tend to ignore outside interference (as the Sasaki and Shimano communities did for a long time, and still do to some degree), to drop out of the regulating organization or simply thumb their nose in gassho and ignore their protests (as Genpo Roshi did and Zenrin Lewis appears to be doing in the instant case). It is also hard to make a regulatory committee or investigation if victims do not come forward, which they have tended not to do. No body can “disbar” a Zen Priest in a world where, if you get kicked out of one church or organization, you simply set up a new church and organization next door.

I believe that the best weapon against abuse will continue to be publicity (such as the Sasaki and Shimano Archives), public protests in letter posted on the internet (such as was done in the Genpo Roshi case http://sweepingzen.com/open-letters-to-kanzeon-zen-center/), making available the resources of groups like “Faith Trust” and persuading the impacted Sangha to let them in, and victims themselves being more willing to speak out publicly or make legal claims for sexual harrassment. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. We must also continue to take into account the possibility of false rumors and malicious claims sometimes being made.

Even one case of abuse should But I want to continue to insist that these cases of abuse … ranging from unwanted sexual overtures to true serial predation of the weak … have been rare. The fact is that, over the 50 year history of Zen in America and hundreds of Teachers, almost all keep their Vows and get limited media attention (because nothing to notice) … while a small handful engage in serious transgressions which garner wide attention.

Couple that with a group of individuals (many who are often heard around SweepingZen) who are quick to shout that the whole Zen enterprise is rotten, and all the Zen Teachers are scoundrels, and one gets a very out of proportion picture of what is really going on. Such people are not better than some places on the internet (Zen Forum International comes to mind) and some people (the kind who scream at Adam for being so “negative” because he honestly provides news of these stories).

Hi Jundo: First, let me say I’m very thankful that we are keeping this discussion respectful and open. This goes a long way to opening dialogue about this very important issue. It’s easy to get heated when discussing these things, and that breaks down dialogue.

I would like to change what you said above, in a way that reflects my beliefs regarding the order of responsibility: “Frankly, if the [Zen teachers who heard] of abuse are not ready to raise a stink, make a loud noise and point fingers, it is often very hard for outsiders to find out “the facts”…. I understand the hesitancy of the [Zen teachers] and the pressure they may feel, but the best course is for the [Zen teachers] to make a loud and public noise. “

In other words, I think us students are look to you as teachers to provide guidance and protection. I believe it is the community of teachers who have a responsibility to do this. This shifting of responsibility is one source of the anger and outrage you are hearing. I believe Zen teachers take a solemn vow to care for all beings. You do see, I can tell from your responses, that it is very hard for Zen teachers to “make a stink” and stop things from the inside if there is no regulatory committee or board, and an agreed on code of ethics. Considering the magnitude of what has happened, why aren’t Zen teachers setting these things in place now, to prevent this (and smaller hurts) from happening again? What is the hold up? I hold all Zen teachers in North America responsible to take the steps to manage their professional community, hold their peers accountable, and make sure safeguards are in place to prevent this from happening again. How am I to have faith in the seriousness about any teacher’s vow otherwise?

This is where lack of faith in all Zen teachers creeps in.

Thank you for hearing me. I have been sitting on these thoughts for a long time in silence. I have retreated from being part of a Zen community in part because of this. I can, however, sit in my own house, sit with different communities for sesshin and not get too involved. But right now, because of all this news, and the fact that there is not a united, outraged, and active movement of Zen teachers making real structural changes, my ability to trust and enter community at this moment is limited. This is a big loss to me. I wonder how many out there feel the same.

If I didn’t know the Zen tradition so well I would be astonished that no one has yet asked how Zenrin Lewis could even accept transmission from this teacher. What does that say about him? What does that say about the Zen community and Zen teachers in general?

No, Spike, this discussion is about the (lacking) sexual ethics of Zen teachers, not my website, and your dull trolling is only a distraction from a serious topic. However, if you really find my work unethical and have something intelligent to say about it, please feel free to post a comment over there. (I am always looking for suggestions on how to make it more offensive to x-buddhist sensibilities.)

Well I’ve been there (your ebbsite), and, really, there’s no “there” there.

It reflects my take on your behavior/opinions here: pretentious, classist, speculative (true, not a fair criticism as a negative), self-glorifying/indulgent, needlessly recondite (well, actually, just one time), ultimately fluffy, etc. (“Someone who has a strong sense of [his own inane] spirituality”?). If it were just funny, then all those negatives might hardly matter.

I see your presentation as gratuitously critical of people or beliefs I admire, people including Genjo and Kobutsu, and Genjo’s specific practices and beliefs, so I’ll listen and reply here (maybe), but I won’t support your approach by, for example, looking at your stuff elsewhere. (Plus, if your “Enkyo” spoof is actually a veiled reference to Ekyo U.S., then so much the worse: I may not agree with her on some things, but she should be out of this kind of loop, imo, however tenuous her connection.)

P.S. I don’t know what else it says about you that Red Shaft sure seems to like tagging along behind you!

Why can’t Genjo Marinello tell Zenrin Lewis that he will have to list his center with a caveat that this is a training facility for a known sexual predator and to get that caveat lifted he would have to pledge to not expose students to Eido Shimano. To just pretend the Jacsonville zen center doesn’t exist and to expunge it from the records is reminiscent of the head in the sand problem that gets zen organizations into these terrible situations. If it’s all about transparency then talk to the Zenrin Lewis guy and fully disclose that a disgraced teacher might be present at his facility. People can make their own decisions.

It might be a good move to delink jzc from azta to protect azta from the taint of illegitimate and possibly criminal connection with Eido Shimano through Shimano’s freshly-designated dharma heir and continuing longtime student Zenrin Lewis. It would be gratuitous for Genjo to do as you suggest, namely warn Zenrin about Shimano, because Zenrin is, I believe, fully aware of all the details of his teacher’s scandalous and harmful behavior. It may be that, to Zenrin, getting dharma transmission, any dharma transmission, outweighs all offsetting concerns.

You might have seen Mr. Nonin’s quoted comments here to the contrary. Please consider going over to zenforuminternaional.org where Mr. Nonin is an administrator, and asking him if what has been said about Zenrin is true, and why he advocates keeping Zenrin affiliated with azta. Many here would no doubt appreciate your effort to clarify this point.

Zenrin Lewis has a long history of assaultive and downright bizarre behavior at DBZ. This is why Shimano never made him a Dharma Heir when he was still ensconced at DBZ. Zenrin has always been a dangerous loose cannon.

I do understand why some are upset with my actions and why others applaud it

The AZTA has no executive committee to refer the matter to, or I would have done so myself before acting. There is no way that I know of to call for a vote outside of the AZTA annual meeting; otherwise, I would have done so. In the mean time, Zenrin has newly acquired credentials by a “real” Zen master from Japan with a lineage that spans 83 generations back to the Historical Buddha; therefore, he has more credibility to attract students and bring them to sesshins at the “Hidden Zendo” with his revered teacher Eido Shimano Roshi. I won’t be a part of it! And as AZTA’s database manager, I am directly a part of it.

AZTA is not a professional organization. AZTA has no ethical guidelines therefore no way to determine if someone is in good standing? At the moment, I have no one with any kind of sanctioned group authority to turn to.

I think it would be very interesting to restore Zenrin’s listing with the caveats and suggestions made here, but for the moment the only real authority lies with those who participate in the annual AZTA meetings. I am working for considerable more structure than this.

After zen figures out how to reform the feudal student teacher relationship that is at the heart of the power abuses discussed in these comments it needs to look at what you call “the 83 generations.”

First, unbroken dharma transmission is false religious myth possibly on par with immaculate conception.
As Morton Schlütter states “scholars have long realized that the single-lineage Chan patriarchy is entirely fictional and that it did not find its final form until the tenth century.”
Everyone from Phillip Yampolsky to Stuart Lacks agrees.

Your own line flowing through Shimano rests on shallow ground as Soen Nakagawa never listed Eido as an transmitted heir. Myoshin-Ji disavowed it. See Erik Storlie article on lineage delusion.

Can we take this opportunity to reform zen in the West, to free it from the institutional flaws of Japanese zen to create something clearer, more direct and free of myth? Certainly Joko Beck, joan Tollifson and Toni Packer and many others have pointed to a clearer and truly minimalist path to Presence.

“As I see it, we must strive to drive the guru out of Zen practice and training. Gurus and Masters are antithetical to Zen. Aren’t we told to metaphorically kill the Buddhas and Ancestors? Let’s truly be ordinary, admit we don’t know anything, nothing is transmitted, the lineages are mythology, all the pomp and ceremony are at best just props and leadership serves only to call us to investigate the unknowable. I tell my “students” I have no students, come and go as you please, we are all followers of the Way, all we really need to know we already have: wake up to the fact that we are the universe aware of itself and therefore are blessed with a caring heart for all “creatures” great and small, animate and inanimate. In this time of celebration: rejoice, death has no sting; exhaust yourself completely, for this life is brief.”

Marinello. I hope you won’t mind explaining one simple matter to me. You say “Let’s truly be ordinary.” Yet, you yourself display sign after sign of Zen specialness. I don’t mean just your physical appearance and naming practice, which yell out: I am Zen! I mean, somewhat more subtly, your vocabulary, your linguistic tics, your underlying rhetoric. Do you see what I mean? Would you mind trying to explain to me what is happening in this gap, in this contradiction? In the end, don’t you mean “Let’s truly be extraordinarily ordinary (in our precious Zen fashion–wink, wink)?

I think Genjo is making a sincere attempt to see clearly what you so vociferously point out. We can all benefit from examining our own motives and behavior. Competitiveness is something that comes up a lot and can cause us to attack others who have taken a different path.

Also Glenn, I can’t help but wonder if you’ve ever done a seven day sesshin with a zen teacher, or if your experience of the official zen world is entirely academic. It easy for us to say things on the internet that we would never say to someone should we sit face to face with them.

Zafrozen. People like Marinello are all the evidence you should need that “sincere attempt” will not get the job done. Much more force and personal risk is required to break through the kinds of ideological blindness that those committed to systems of thought–of which Zen is an instance–so clearly exhibit to those of us not similarly ensnared. The all too obvious fact is that Marinello’s statement above–“As I see it,” etc.–would, if truly acted on, lead to a state of affairs that Marinello, as he now presents himself, could certainly not abide. For one thing, we’d no longer have any use for such Zen explicators. “Ordinary” means ordinary. No ordinary person would ever tolerate a Zen program. We ordinary people find Zen ridiculous.

It’s none of your business, but yes, I have participated in dozens of sesshins, long and short, over my forty years of Buddhist practice (fifteen in Zen). I have no interest in the academic study of Buddhism, either.

You just seem like a lot of sour grapes and disappointment. From your posts, you have already made up your mind on this issue. You appear ready to pounce and criticize instead of having useful ideas and dialogue. And what is this blanket statement “People like Marinello”… and who might that be?

It is truly wonderful that you can interpret the ordinariness of this priest as something special. To find something like “linguistic tics”, zen-like or otherwise, check out Chobo-ji’s podcasts of Genjo’s talks: with your acute observational skills, I’m sure you’ll be able to notice something to bear out your interpretation. All kinds of “zen rhetoric” or “zen vocabulary” there–you’ll have a field day! Or, regarding your comments here, you might consider heeding this Mark Rothko quote: “Silence is so accurate.”

P.S. Since you seem to know something of this priest, including presumably at least a little bit of his significant personal history, how about if you stay far, far away from speculation about stuff like “linguistic tics”?

Yes, I’ve long been immersed in “Zen” language and this immersion undoubtedly comes through in my choice of words. I’m not at all ashamed of this, as I really appreciate how this tradition’s poetic language is able to point at that which can’t be said, only intimated. Likewise, I find that traditional ritual and form not only provides a strong container for deep zazen, but also hints at what is not observable with the five primary senses. This is after all a multidimensional reality and our five primary senses are only tuned to a fraction of the spectrum of what is.

And how do these extraordinary preferences of yours–for Zen language and ritual, for metaphysical notions such as “multidimensional reality,” for instance–square with your plea for “ordinariness”? None of that is ordinary.

Every discipline has a bit of its own language. Think of various kinds of physicians, lawyers, accountants, scientists, or clergy, they all have vocabularies that are shortcuts for speaking to others within the same sub-discipline. I see nothing wrong with this.

By the way, physicists sometimes speak of reality having eleven dimensions, I don’t know, but I suspect it is more than this.

So is Zen analogous to law or science, to something, that is, that requires its own special language game? Or is it ordinary? We ordinary people do not speak in legalese. If Zen is an expression of actual human reality, why not drop the theater? If our ordinary forms are inadequate to accommodate Zen, what does that say about Zen? Can you not imagine a thoroughly humanized (ordinary) Zen. I would be genuinely interested in that.

Genjo,
You managed to squeeze so many hackneyed Zen tropes and mystifications in that paragraph, it’s almost incomprehensible to an ordinary reader. Ironic, isn’t it? Anyway, let’s take a look at a few of them:

Gurus and Masters are antithetical to Zen. This is plain wrong – unless you’re referring to ”funeral Zen” or some phantasmagorial image of Zen that has nothing to do with actually existing Zen traditions, past or present, Asian or western.

Aren’t we told to metaphorically kill the Buddhas and Ancestors? Yes, actually existing Zen has indeed repeated its ritual admonitions to kill the Buddha, discard the raft, not confuse the finger with the moon, not put another head on top of your own, et cetera, ad nauseam. At the same time, Zen remains a reactionary and hierarchical institution, obsessed with its ancestry.

Let’s truly be ordinary … Would that be ordinary-ordinary? Or Zen ordinary? When your ZFI comment was discussed on Facebook last week, I suggested that if you were serious about being ordinary, and getting away from that cult-like atmosphere you no longer feel comfortable with, a good place to start would be to let go of Japanese dharma names and imported robes. Hardly surprising, you responded that you see no reason to do that.

… all the pomp and ceremony are at best just props … The pomp and ceremony, the bells and smells, the status of the Teacher and the orientalist phantasies of north American Zen are not innocent, or merely tacky ornaments. Why not investigate, in detail, what these ritual forms do, and especially how they contribute to a cult-like environment?

Let’s … admit we don’t know anything This kind of statement has become quite popular among x-buddhist teachers. Sometimes it’s a flirt with apophatic rhetoric, sometimes it seems more like a display of false modesty. Why not try and be more ordinary in your self-presentation as a teacher? Be specific about your qualifications, skills and expertise.

I could go on, but I noticed that smart-ass imposter Bhanteyabhato Wallis has some questions for you as well.

I agree completely with your statements above. I applaud that you are involved to the extent you are in exposing corruption and excess in zen.

As a professional software engineer, database administrator, website manager and treasurer for my current sangha and a past one led by a corrupt “teacher” I feel the need to interject about the ethics of allowing yourself to alter a database without your client’s permission. While the ethical standards of “Zen Masters” may be unclear, the ethical standards of DBAs are. That is NOT YOUR DATABASE. You took what did not belong to you by altering it on your own authority.

I was once a priest, but was forced to drop that when I left my teacher. I still have my vows.

You say that “No, I do not think it a good idea to just go spreading overheard rumors. That can create victims of a different sort. ”

Could you please point to one Buddhist teacher who has been “victimized” in this way? I can’t think of a single one.

Hi Patricia,

I know of two cases, and will not “name the names” because to do so will only perpetuate the rumor. One involved a Zen Teacher in America and a claim made by a disturbed individual who appeared to have a history of doing so with many many older men in her life, and another case in Japan of a woman who seemed to be some kind of “priest groopie” and tried to seduce several of the young priests during a Sesshin at a Japanese monastery while I was attending. Apart from the Zen world, I have personal knowledge of male friends who experienced, in one case, a sexual harassment claim by another man that appears to have been related to anger for not getting a promotion, and another case of a friend who was told that he was responsible for a pregnancy that was not his (the motive was money, since the woman made the same claim to two other men at the time).

One wrong does not excuse another, and we have to tread carefully in all these cases.

And to WinterRobin below …

I do agree that Zen Teachers have been too quiet in protesting cases of abuse. There has been a tendency to look first at what is happening within one’s own house, and not in the house down the street. This is bad. It is wrong.

The AZTA should have a Code of Ethics for its members and require its members to have one in place (just as the SZBA has had for a long time). One the other hand, I believe that it will never be possible to set up some kind of “regulatory committee or board” for the simple reason that the “trouble makers” and their Sangha tend to ignore outside interference (as the Sasaki and Shimano communities did for a long time, and still do to some degree), to drop out of the regulating organization or simply thumb their nose in gassho and ignore their protests (as Genpo Roshi did and Zenrin Lewis appears to be doing in the instant case). It is also hard to make a regulatory committee or investigation if victims do not come forward, which they have tended not to do. No body can “disbar” a Zen Priest in a world where, if you get kicked out of one church or organization, you simply set up a new church and organization next door.

I believe that the best weapon against abuse will continue to be publicity (such as the Sasaki and Shimano Archives), public protests in letter posted on the internet (such as was done in the Genpo Roshi case http://sweepingzen.com/open-letters-to-kanzeon-zen-center/), making available the resources of groups like “Faith Trust” and persuading the impacted Sangha to let them in, and victims themselves being more willing to speak out publicly or make legal claims for sexual harrassment. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. We must also continue to take into account the possibility of false rumors and malicious claims sometimes being made.

Even one case of abuse is wrong. But I want to continue to insist that these cases of abuse … ranging from unwanted sexual overtures to true serial predation of the weak … have been rare. The fact is that, over the 50 year history of Zen in America and hundreds of Teachers, almost all keep their Vows and get limited media attention (because nothing to notice) … while a small handful engage in serious transgressions which garner wide attention.

Couple that with a group of individuals (many who are often heard around SweepingZen) who are quick to shout that the whole Zen enterprise is rotten, and all the Zen Teachers are scoundrels, and one gets a very out of proportion picture of what is really going on. Such people are not better than some places on the internet (Zen Forum International comes to mind) and some people (the kind who scream at Adam for being so “negative” because he honestly provides news of these stories) and want to sweep things under a rug.

You can set these things up, and it can work. Maybe not perfectly, but not perfect is better than nothing. Actually, I have heard several very good ideas about how to do this very thing. Sounds like you are not willing to do this work, or even be creative and think about it. How can I trust you are sincerely sorry about the harm your peers have caused if you aren’t willing to think something through and try? How can i think about what zen teachers do seriously when zen teachers themselves aren’t taking themselves seriously, as shown by not taking the steps all helping professions have taken to protect the people they serve. Again, how can I take your vow seriously? (not you personally Juno, everyone)

This is not Zen bashing, this is a real dilemma of mine. I would love to work with and trust a Zen teacher again. I respect myself too much to put my spiritual health in the hands of a community that is not taking serious steps to regulate itself.

Thanks for listening, I know you will “yes…but” again in response, instead of empathize. So, signing off and happy holidays all. I’m going to go sign up for a class with Tutteji – he seems quite transparent.

Aren’t Zen teachers considered members of the clergy, and governed by the laws that apply to such, rather than as members of the helping professions? This is an important distinction in terms of disciplining (I can think of no other word) the rogues and underlines (under our system) why a governing body ( or a united church) cannot be imposed and why there is no Zen community that could regulate itself. There are people and groups that can, from time to time, expose the frauds.

I hope you can learn to trust people again. Almost all the Zen folks I know, with few exceptions, are decent and sincere people who deserve your trust. One doctor or school teacher may be bad, but most are trying to help.

If you have a plan and some specific good ideas to set up such a system, please let me know. I am all for it and we can work toward it, and try to get others to do so too.

“Zen Master” is a misunderstood term. I take it to be like “master plumber”, a person who was an apprentice for a number of years until mastering some skill to a certain degree, or “karate master” or “master carpenter”. That does not mean that the “master” is particularly anyone special beyond a certain level (hopefully) of competitive in their art, nor someone infallible. I mean, even the most experienced “master violinist” will sometimes hit a flat note, the very competent “master surgeon” will sometimes miss a stitch. However, for the most part, they should act artfully, skillfully, honestly and sincerely.

I just saw that Mumon, in some of his writings, seems to use the term “Zen Server” in place of Zen “Teacher”. I think that is excellent and right on. I have been looking for such a term for a long time, because it captures that any Zen priest is in service of all the sentient beings, one of the waiters in Buddha’s restaurant or orderlies in the Dharma hospital cleaning bed pans. I am going to use that interchangeably for “Zen Teacher”.

The fact that anyone ever took all these first generation Servers who came from Asia to the West as “superhuman” figures shows how naive we all can be. (It also shows the character of the Teachers who let their Western students do so). Oh, don’t get me wrong: The Dharma which the teacher may teach is “superhuman” in the sense of transcending small human concerns, and there is a certain amount of respect in bowing down to the Kesa and Traditions which the Teacher/Server teaches. That is something that may be worth honoring and bowing toward. But any “Server” who then engaged in unethical practices, hurt or abused students or the like, just dishonored it all.

I feel that most … the vast vast majority of … Zen Masters/Teachers/Servers that I know are trustworthy and do not dishonor their role, are sincere and dedicated, try to be helpful to so many, and are quite competent and artful (frequently gifted) in their work.

I mean, even the most experienced “master violinist” will sometimes hit a flat note, the very competent “master surgeon” will sometimes miss a stitch. However, for the most part, they should act artfully, skillfully, honestly and sincerely.
– Jundo

Why should a master of something act more artfully, skillfully, honestly and sincerely than anyone else? What about a master con artist? Or a master pickpocket?

Skill at something may or may not include the qualities of honestly and sincerity. We know from numerous examples that these qualities are not essential for Zen Mastery.

I just saw that Mumon, in some of his writings, seems to use the term “Zen Server” in place of Zen “Teacher”…

You’re defiantly serving it up thick here.

I would question anyone who advertises their own good qualities. It strikes me as far too self-serving. I’m sure they lap it up at Treeleaf though.

The Dharma which the teacher may teach is “superhuman” in the sense of transcending small human concerns, and there is a certain amount of respect in bowing down to the Kesa and Traditions which the Teacher/Server teaches.

The Dharma is superhuman and transcends small human concerns. Wow, that’s great, it’s just too bad the Dharma doesn’t teach. If the Dharma taught, instead of you “Servers” (yes, I capitalized the S in Server as you have in reference to yourself), the Zen tradition wouldn’t be ripe with all these human concerns and transgressions from you Servers. Obviously you Zen Servers are not superhuman, or even exceptional in any way. You Serve a system of meaning like any other sort of clergy from any other religion.

You Serve meaning. You are not what you Serve. Do you understand that?

I feel that most … the vast vast majority of … Zen Masters/Teachers/Servers that I know are trustworthy…

I’m sure that’s how you feel, Jundo, but you can’t know how trustworthy they are. How many Zen Servers do you actually know anyway? I’m sure that you’re aquatinted with a small portion. Being aquatinted with someone is not even close to knowing them.

And while we’re on the subject of trust. It should be clear that I don’t trust you.

Genjo Osho strikes me as an honest man, not just another pious Server of meaning.

And, yes, my blog is mostly parody and satire (with the occassional ”serious” discussion). That this isn’t obvious to people like Spike (Or Jundo himself) is actually quite frightening.
~Tutte

Perhaps frightening, but defiantly hilarious. What’s worse is the first response in the Jundo link quoted above, which starts with, “I’ll bet too many people will really think there is a teaching in there somewhere.” Granted this comment is from a Treeleaf student, but to be so easily fooled and to learn nothing about yourself from being so easily fooled, that proves who’s time has been wasted, if it proves nothing else.

Withholding judgment of teachers can be an insidious way of siding with the more powerful.
~Patricia Ivan

This observation bares repeating.

It’s in our nature to side with those of higher social status, because they can generally do more for us. It’s a very base instinct, and everyone is subject to it’s influence. Zen Masters are no exception. Indeed they may be more prone to its influence than the average person, because they actively seek status. They practice like their ‘hair is on fire’ to attain status. They will even accept authorization from an apparently unauthentic source to acquire status…

Hi DBZ Student,
You don’t need to be a techie to find the Jundo quote; there’s a link to it in one of my comments above. Or simply click here. A very recent text on the way Buddhist teachers stupid/smug/cynical response to criticism can be found here; in it you will also find some comments on Jundo’s response to what you call the “Tutte hoax site”.

To get back on topic: Jundo’s “stupidity” here had to do with his unwillingness or inability to respond in a straightforward manner, and the fact that he is either too naïve or insidious to be taken seriously in this discussion. (Please read the comments by Winterrobin and Anon if you haven’t already, and this should become obvious.)

Anyway, let’s stay on topic. This discussion is not about Jundo, or my site, or even the general inability of x-buddhist teachers to deal with criticism.

I would caution though that some might see it as bad form to come onto someone else’s blog like Adam’s here to advertise your own blog for whatever purpose or move people away from free comments to the discussion you personnaly would like to have, because no prob with your opinion but this is not your own blog to direct. And as you say this shouldn’t be about your site, but.

The link Tutte gives to Treeleaf Zendo shows that Jundo did not give that quote, but rather another member of Treeleaf. Or is this another example of what Jundo does call “bitingly funny satire” on that Treeleaf page?

I’d still like to know why Tutte is inhabiting the body of the Mayor of London. Does Boris Johnson know what Tutte is doing with it?

Caodemarte
I shouldn’t have used the sloppy phrase “Jundo quote”, as the discussion was about a quote from a discussion taking place at Jundo’s (or, rather, Treeleaf’s) forum, and not from the man himself. Sorry or any possible conusion and thanks for pointing this out!

I have reason to believe that Blonde Boris is aware that his spitting image is an award-winning spiritual teacher. He doesn’t seem to mind. Do you?

DBZ student
I’m certainly not trying to manipulate or “direct” what’s going on in this thread. Also,
I’m not participating in the dicussion in order to advertise my own blog; I merely responded to Spike’s nonsense about it, which was probably a waste of time.

As I’ve said before, I think this discussion about sexual ethics is an important one, and I hate to see it disrupted by comments about my blog. If someone feels they have something to say about it, please do it here or here.

I don’t have proper context here and I am new to this discussion, but it is not very difficult to see who is a proper Buddhist and who is not.

For example, it’s easy to see that Spike is a very angry man and seems to hold a very deep and very abiding grudge against Rev. Tutteji and Doctor Glenn Wallis. Such vitriol displayed by Spike doesn’t discount him from being Buddhist, but makes it much, much less likely. Proper Buddhists do not viciously attack their Dharma Brothers in this manner.
I’m sorry you’re hurting, Spike. I don’t know what horrible acts you have committed, causing this terrible Dukkha of yours. But I’m sorry you grieve; and I will dedicate some of the Merit I have gained through many years of intensive Spiritual Practice towards your healing, so that you too may become a more wise and compassionate person, less filled with the destructive forces of Anger, Greed, and Ignorance to which you seem so attached. But you also need to Practice yourself, Spike. Let me humbly suggest you start doing some simple breathing exercises instead of attacking others on the Internet.

People who are angry are usually dead-set on revealing the bad in people (or inventing it when it’s not there to begin with). So they usually don’t accept answers that don’t fit their worldview. Therefore, it’s not likely anything said here will help you change your mind. I feel true Compassion for you, Spike.

I take my Precepts seriously. I ask others here who are Buddhists to do the same.

Characterizing Spike as an angry non-Buddhist with bad karma is of course the wise and compassionate thing to do.

Just kidding. It’s actually what is known as an ad hominem, a logical fallacy designed to invalidate whatever Spike has shared on the subject, because it springs from anger and “horrible acts” of some sort.

Sweeping Zen readers aren’t stupid. Does this sort of thing fly where you usually hang out?

Even you Zennies who tone it down bear out Freud’s insight into the infantile yearnings for security, meaning, and comfort of all-knowing (enlightened, etc.) power-figures like Roshi and sensei. The fact that Roshi can’t stop poking his stick were it doesn’t belong is, among other things of course, evidence of Zen’s impotency. The emphasis is on “Zen’s.” Like I said:

Zen has some good shit going on, but no Zen practitioner will ever discover it.

I happen to half agree on the funny Japanese names, costumes and heads. That is not what anything is about. On the other hand, there is some value in honoring Tradition, just as the Chinese made Chinese versions of Sanskrit words and clothing, the Japanese dressed like Chinese people doing the same and chanted in a Japanized form of Chinese versions of Sanskrit!

You can call me Jundo, or Pure Way (these names, like mine, are often given half in jest or as an aspiration) or James. Sometimes I wear a T-Shirt, but sometimes I dress in a Koromo to honor our roots. Sometimes my hair grows, and sometimes I shave to remind me that vanity and attachment ain’t where it’s at.

The Kesa, however, is a special garment because we invest it (invest pun intended) with symbolism about Tradition, “Robe of Liberation Boundless” and all that … much like Christian people glue two pieces of wood together and find something sacred there.

We might do without all that and just sit Zazen. On the other hand, we would lose some beautiful aspects of Tradition if we just tossed all that old stuff in the dumpster.

The fellow named Glenn who speaks about a “lack of sexual ethics” in Zen just speaks foolishly and without education in the matter. We have those little “Precepts”, including the one on misusing sexuality. Of course, there are always some folks who will breach them … now as in the Buddha’s time (partly explaining why the Vinaya is hundreds of pages of stories of people falling down).

I think you have some fair criticisms for Buddhism, and Zen, and see you to be an intelligent man. It’s hard for me to want to interact with you, however, based on how you choose to address people, including myself (re: Stephen Batchelor’s article).

I believe there is a way to be critical while also remaining civil and respectful. That said, you’re no doubt intelligent enough to reread your own posts and see how they will be read by others. I can only assume, then, that you are angry about something and that you intend to be provocative in your statements. But, to what end, I wonder?

I know I would take you much more seriously and engage you more if I felt you’d not bite my head off for doing so. Buddhism or not, this world needs some help, and belittling and berating others who disagree with you is not a way to navigate life, imho. Believe me, I know. I’ve done it myself.

The actual origins of the “patched robe” of Zen is more interesting. Early Buddhist are said to have collected scraps of cloth that were discarded or taken off dead bodies, cut into them squares, dyed them with a mix of every color available (presumably also salvaged), and sewed the resulting dull black or brown squares together into a robe.

The Theravadan robes on the other hand are said to have been copied from the bright robes that convicts were required to wear in India at the time of the Buddha.

Both share the same concept of clothing that was very humble, even shameful. By contrast those robes today stand out as either bizarre affectations or badges of respect — depending on your point of view.

Although I haven’t taken formal precepts or ordinations, I certainly understand the “investments” you describe. I’ve always had deep feelings when reciting the various Soto liturgy, such as the robe chant in the dim light of early morning sesshin. In fact, I find all of the rituals, especially Oriyuki, very beautiful and evocative. However, while I’ve plunged into zazen with enthusiasm from the earliest days, as somewhat of a loner and a cranky, reclusive type, I’ve kept my distance from the more formalistic commitments of Zen practice, despite their seductive qualities.

Thus I think I’m able to see the rituals, robes, and all that, from both sides — as one who appreciates them from within but also as an outsider would see them. There have been times, especially in the Green Gulch Zendo, with the huge drum beating, incense rising up, and Reb Anderson, with his perfect posture and robes, standing like a high priest before the altar with it’s impressive statue — when I’ve suddenly felt like I was in B-grade movie featuring some exotic cult about to roast an Englishman.

Recently the SFZC celebrated it’s 50th anniversary and the San Francisco Chronicle had a front page story on it, but I had to wince when I saw the photo they used featuring everyone bowing on the floor before a statue. I imagined what someone who knew nothing of Zen would think when viewing such a picture.

Perhaps your lineage, which has some connection to Kodo Sawaki and his “Zen without toys,” is a little more low key, but I can’t help feeling that a lot of Soto folks have gone overboard and I can understand how they could become the object of ridicule by outsiders.

Oh, I agree that it depends on the person. Some folks really need the incense and bells and conch shells because such really speaks to the sacred. That is the doorway to some meaning for them. Others (I am one) appreciate a more stripped down and down to earth approach … although I like to keep certain Traditions and rituals that seems to have a meaning and some good Teaching in them for me (I like Oryoki as a lesson in each bite as sacred, versus our drive thru fast food culture). Other folks don’t need more than a Zafu, and leave the rest. To each their own.

Last night, here in Japan, I had a very special opportunity to observe and participate in part of a fire walking ceremony with the Shugendo folks (Buddhist mountain ascetics). The ceremony culminates with us all walking across the hot coals … just like here. We are purified of all our faults and obstructions … all cleansed for the New Year!

Yes, people are attracted to different approaches, or more often, no approach at all.

It’s only natural to think our particular way is the best, or we wouldn’t be committed to it completely. But Zazen is very pure and open, so that it can include everything — even the rituals and robes that sometimes strike me as a distraction and attachment.

Zazen eventually leads to the source of all religions and we can appreciation each of them. When the Buddha suggested letting go of the raft once one is firmly on the other side, I don’t think he was referring to zazen, but to such religious forms. However, if you are in the business of trying to ferry folks across, then perhaps the raft is necessary. Even though meditation is enjoying some popularity, for most people, zazen alone, such as in “mindfulness practice,” is insufficient to inspire the dedication and perseverance required to make real progress on this path.

What has become clear is that zazen doesn’t automatically cause anyone to conform to ethical sexual mores, even the rather flexible ones encoded in the Zen precepts. In fact, it appears to make most of us even more horny than normal, thanks to the effects of sensory deprivation and better concentration in the moment.

If as you’ve indicated, it is really not possible, given the current state of Zen in the West, to enforce ethical standards regarding teacher student relationships and we must rely on the force of popular opinion, then I’m not very optimistic that anything is going change. Exposure and censure such as has occurred here on the internet is not likely to do much more than cause misbehaving teachers to cover their tracks better. But, at this point it appears that trying to pretend it isn’t problem will just invite more anger and disillusionment.

As an old zen guy, forty years of practice, thirty without a credentialed teacher, ten with, I’d say that zen would profit from emphasizing conduct—nonviolence, generosity, kindness, openness, honesty, and doing good not harm—instead of emphasizing awakening, realization, kensho, enlightenment, authority, obedience, just do it, ritual, costume, oryoki, ineffability, inscrutability, mystic understanding, transmission, that which cannot be expressed by language and reason, etc., and the ridiculous idea that awakening is automatically accompanied by compassion. No! So much goes wrong in this teaching! It is soo similar to the sometime Christian belief that good works are meaningless and valueless compared to faith and grace. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong! The evidence is everywhere visible, clear, and obvious. Meditation is helpful, yes. The revelation of relativity inspires awe, yes. But the ethic is sine qua non. Enough of this baloney about buddhist masters having special insight into the minds of others, checking questions, psychological intuition, etc. Please! Did Suzuki choose wisely in Baker? Did Trungpa choose wisely in Tendzin? How many of Katagiri’s dharma heirs fucked a student a la Katagiri? “My actions are the ground upon which I stand.” Are we really to believe that it is difficult to know a kind person from a cruel person, an arrogant person from a humble person, a know it all from a know nothing, a brave person from a coward, an open, honest person from a liar and a deceiver? A loving person from a selfish person? No. The sword of praajna cuts through the baloney.
Robert

I agree that more emphasis on conduct in Zen training is needed, but that doesn’t necessarily preclude the more abstruse matters which are unique to Zen. All Buddhist traditions supposedly adhere to Sila (Conduct), Samadhi (Concentration)and Prajna (Wisdom) in their training. Obviously, in Zen, conduct has not been as popular as the other two, although after their sexual scandals, centers like the SFZC got back into the precepts.

I’ve also shook my head at how some of those successors turned out. In Suzuki Roshi’s case, he wanted to select an American, but his students were still pretty young and none of them had been training with him for much more than a decade (not long as you know), so his choices were somewhat limited. Baker had been a great asset to the Zen Center, and his organizational skills probably offered the best hope for it’s continuing development. Maybe Suzuki thought his character flaws wouldn’t be such a problem. No one is completely omniscient.

I do not understand the objections to Genjo’s actions…. With respect, Genjo, of all of us has a unique and up close and personal relationship to this issue… He has always acted with candor and equanimity. His responses have been thoughtful and measured… he has also been vulnerable as well…. To those of you who are upset here, what is it that you do not understand…. Do you wish to further pollute the well with more spawn from an abusive teacher who has proven to be a predator, untrustworthy and deluded time and time again? No, I applaud Genjo with having Zen balls and a Zen spine to stand up and be counted and to take action… the rest of you…. grow some.

I don’t really understand what objections you’re talking about. It seems to me that very few people (at least here in this thread) have questioned Genjo. He might have ”Zen balls” (whatever hell that is) the size of Rinzai’s, but that doesn’t count for much to those not seduced by dharmic hallucinations. We only ask for integrity and intelligence enough to stay the hell away from hucksters and sociopaths.

“This is unacceptable conduct. Genjo was not given the power to delete members from our list, so he has self-righteously overstepped his bounds. Can someone agree to take over our database, and if Genjo resigns from AZTA, that would be fine with me.”

Imo it isn’t whether only a “very few people” have questioned Genjo that is concerning, it is the possible influence of people such as Mr. Nonin and perhaps a few like-minded brethren at azta, whose endorsement of Zenrin’s transmission by Shimano at this point could a., hurt the effort to make azta adopt ethical recommendations for zen teachers (how could member Zenrin qualify?), or b., hurt prospective students attempting to do ‘due diligence’ in a teacher search, who might be misled in thinking azta membership confers something like legitimacy, standing or acceptance by other ethical teachers, etc. Such a student might unwisely/unknowingly choose Zenrin or some other apparently ethically-challenged azta teacher like Mr. Nonin based on this.

Good job Glen on the whole the Tutteji parody website. Very funny stuff. You are very creative. Where you lose me is with the mean spirited and aggressive rhetoric. I’m sure you don’t act that way towards your students and co-workers at the Won Institute.

I’m glad you appreciate my work. I have to inform you, though, that Tutteji Wachtmeister Dai Osho is not a nom de plume for Glenn Wallis. I am also sorry to hear that you find Glenn’s writing more destructive, mean-spirited, and aggressive than my own. May I suggest you take a closer look at my site; hopefully you will then realize exactly how offensive it’s supposed to be. At the same time, I promise to intensify my efforts. There have been too many cheers from x-buddhist teachers lately, indicating that I should do something differently.

Carl, I warn you: do not listen to that fake Tutteji! The world of the Gurus is a treacherous miasma of Maya. BE STILL AND KNOW THAT I AM HE!

Now, to the point: Your ignorance of the $upreme Dharma is appalling. I hereby ban you from further intercourse with the Enlightened Zen Masters who have lowered their dignity to have sincere dharmic intercourse with the likes of you.

Regarding the cost of study at my institute, you obviously have not realized the Oneness of Spirit and Market, so keep your mouth shut. How shameful of you not to know that 33,000 is the mystical Number encoded in the work of Bodhisattva Ayn Rand. I will teach you how to manifest its hidden power in your daily life, but you will have to pay me first.

Very funny stuff Tutteji a.k.a. Glenn Wallis. Thank you, I always appreciate a good parody and I think Zen has had it coming for a long time. I too think the Zen Guru myth is a joke and has got to go. Although, like the name (Ruin) of your punk rock band implies, I do believe you are on a path of destruction attempting to “ruin” and destroy everything and everyone not associated with your “correct” version of Buddhism. This is evidenced by your mean spirited and overly aggressive comments.

Trying to get Zen teachers to organize and act collectively on anything is a bit like trying to herd a bunch of cats. IMO, it ain’t gonna happen. However, I do believe that thanks to people speaking up and forums like Sweeping Zen,a shift has occurred. I think breaches in ethics are taken more seriously and at least there is exposure and consequence now. I can only hope that the importance of ethical conduct has been brought to the forefront of Zen. I thank those individuals like Genjo and Kobutsu for stepping up and practicing good.

Are the handful of sexual predators on the vulnerable, date rapists and serial harassers helping save Sentient Beings, practicing Compassion, keeping their vows to be gentle and non-harming, filled with Wisdom? No. They are filled with anger, need, some inner wound which drives them.

Likewise open for criticism are places are places like Zen Forum International, some (emphasis on “some”) of the Zen Teachers in AZTA and elsewhere, and “see no evil” Zen students who would like to sweep all mention of these incidents under a rug.

But are those critics who then turn around with an ax to grind, harsh speech, rumor, innuendo, anger, a need for vendetta helping save Sentient Beings, practicing Compassion, keeping their vows to be gentle and non-harming, filled with Wisdom? No. They are also filled with anger, need, some inner wound which drives them.

I feel that all extremes do harm to Zen students, the latter by creating excess disillusion. Their attempts to paint most Zen Teachers as a hoard of war mongering, sex crazed cheats and crooks spreading unhelpful dependence and outdated rituals and traditions is also extreme and misguided.

I believe that both extremes cause harm. One does not cure the disease infecting a finger by ignoring the places of infection, nor by taking a knife to the whole body or attacking the patient. I would urge some of the more vehement, bitter voices here to calm down and be more constructive.

Jundo Cohen, you’re painting a picture of extremes. That’s how it may exist in your mind, but the fact is merely that the truth of the Zen guru model is becoming known. It’s a model which has obviously lived FAR past it’s stale date.

The King has no clothes, “God is dead,” etc etc… Time to wake up. Time to let go.

As a fully transmitted Soto Zen Teacher, supporter of AZTA and a member in good standing of Zen Forum International, I usually don’t read trashy websites like this. I am, frankly, shocked to see such an undignified display of nonsense. Followers of the Way should study with a Teacher and not concern themselves with such rubbish.

I am happy to report that I have guided many, many serious practitioners who get this point, and stay away from sites like this one. From what I’ve seen, they’re in the majority of those interested in the Way.

I love to speculate. Steven Hawking says he is not trapped in his body, his mind roams the universe. My subjective experience also includes this mind we all share. At least that’s how it seems to me. But we are getting off topic. I’m working to improve zen practice and training. There will always be room for improvement. Others are working to eliminate it, as the current form of guru zen has harmed many. I understand this.

Tutteji Wallis: What if you do lay “ruin” to the current Zen and Buddhist ideology and expression? O.k. now let’s say everything is destroyed? Now what? Punk Rock Anarchy (albeit a middle aged version with homes, jobs, cars, and kids)?Is there a particular “raft” you have in mind? Perhaps, Won Buddism? Critical Buddhism? Cruel Theory-Sublime Practice non-buddhist buddhism?

What you, Tom and Matthias don’t seem to realize is that you ARE the very thing you are attacking. You really are Tutteji. The delusions of grandeur and intellectual superiority are real. The $33,000 tuition is real. Won Buddhism is real. Cruel Theory/Sublime Practice is real, existing as just another version of Buddhism(what you guys for some reason refer to as x-buddhism). Don’t you guys see the irony here?

This site has exposed some shady aspects of north American Zen. Glenn, Tom, Matthias, and a few other people have offered a more general and much more radical and thorough critique of x-buddhism. but there is no unified church of Unbuddhismus around. Think of their offering as a conceptual toolbox (or ammunition depot), instead. What you do with it is entirely up to you.

As in psychiatry, the ethos should be ‘presumed’ that it is inappropriate for a Zen master or Roshi to become deeply sexually involved with a student — Due to the profoundly vulnerable position of the student, just as with the psychiatrist ‘patient.’ This ethos should be presumed regardless of whether there is an articulate, specific set of rules that ‘outlaw’ or forbid such conduct — because the vulnerability itself is inherent in the relationship.

When the AZTA includes a zen center in its listing, it is in effect and in essence, vouching for that zen center and insinuating that it meets a threshold standard that makes it “trustworthy” and thereby, worthy of consideration by a student. Does the AZTA really want to be in a position where has to say “some of the centers listed here may be ‘scam operations’ or sham operations, or fraudulent schemes for shaking-down students for sex and money?”

If the AZTA doesn’t step up to the plate and assume responsibility for setting minimal ethical standards for those listings then it is abdicating the entire premise of its existence. If it serves no meaningful purpose then the AZTA should be dissolved. That would resolve the dilamma.

Jundo Cohen, whom I appreciated for some other remarks in the past, claimed the following: “but you cannot lump those two (and a few like them) into the category of sexual predators, date rapists and serial harrassers (which means largely Sasaki and Shimano …”

I wonder now – as date rape is a crime in the US, Eido was not sued (nor was Sasaki, to my knowledge) – if Jundo has not committed a crime himself here (defamation et al.). In Germany this would be the case.

And what about all the sex we do not know about? Dammit …

So judging a teacher is based on our limited knowledge anyway. Now, it’s time to proof and testify. I mean all you big mouthes, now you should find someone who sues.

Considering Baker, Maezumi, Katagiri and what we know of them here in Europe from their writings or through videos … hmm, hmm … strangely enough, those who are blamed the most (Sasaki and Shimano) seemed to have the deepest insight to me. Or maybe it’s just their age or their being traditional. Or maybe there is not only a correlation between zen development (practice) and sexual conduct. Maybe the more one seems to represent traditional zen, the more likely he is to be attacked.

I would like to know from those insiders who met them: In which order would you say the mentioned “big five” had the most disciples, the most popular sesshin? Katagiri, Maezumi, Baker, Sasaki, Shimano? Let’s see if I’m surprised. Who came first? Who last?

For years I followed the fate of Pattaya’s biggest orphanage, founded by a Redemptorist named Father Ray. The Irishman was a jovial drinker, well liked by the children. He didn’t even care to make them Christians. Would you believe it, when he was old and shortly before his death, someone decided to start a smear campaign against him. As it probably seemed to ridiculous to target him directly, a rumour was spreach that donating paedophiles could kind of “rent” children at the orphanage for a couple of days. Disgusting, in my view, those rumours. But they helped to disturb the community for a while.

I don’t know why you’re so insistent in asking why he’s not been sued or something similar. If one digs in to the why nots, it’s fairly easy to find the answer. Incidentally, defamation would be making false statements about an individual that are damaging to them. Based on the numerous accounts of women who have come forward regarding the two men in question, there are more than enough eyewitnesses to these realities. Please read Giko David Rubin’s piece, or the Witness Council reports. In the case of Sasaki, as Giko points out, at least one call to a crisis center had been made and one police report had been filed. It helps when people know the extent of things when debating these issues. Take your time reading them, and then spend some time at the shimanoarchive.com and sasakiarchive.com.

“The truth is that rape and sexual assault are two of the most underreported crimes in our society. Estimates show that between 50–90% of rapes go unreported. Factoring unreported rapes together with the odds of an arrest being made and the chances of getting a felony conviction, only 6% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail. In other words: 15 of 16 rapists walk free.”

At any rate, be well and please take your time learning about the things you’re discussing here these last few days.

Here it is (wiki): “The four (4) categories of slander that are actionable per se are (i) accusing someone of a crime; (ii) alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease; (iii) adversely reflecting on a person’s fitness to conduct their business or trade; and (iv) imputing serious sexual misconduct. Here again, the plaintiff need only prove that someone had published the statement to any third party.”

If Shimano wishes to challenge these accusations and can establish malicious intent and recoup damage suffered he is welcome to try. However, truth is a defense against libel charges in the US. The fact that no one seems concerned about being charged with libel indicates that they are pretty confident that the accusations are true. It would seem at this point that the evidence they could cite is overwhelming.

Adam: I took my time. And I found in the Archive what you just confirmed. I just thought I might have overlooked s.th. important.

Once again, in my country accusations in the web or somewhere else would not be enough, neither a “call to a crisis center” nor a “police report”. Even the media that is not tabloid and follows a code of ethics does usually only report in such cases when the prosecutor is actively investigating. A defamation case would still be possible, that’s why I wanted to know more. I don’t believe that this is much different in the US.

It is easy to suppose that s.o. does not know what he is talking about. My book shelf is full of literature about our topic. So, Adam, you may also know this: According to Kanin, E.J., (1994) “False Rape Accusations”, Archives of Sexual Behavior, V23, P81-92, 41 % of rape accusations were fabrications, by admission of the women. We surely lack more research, but we may keep that in mind. (Once again, it was not me talking of rape in the Shimano case.)

I don’t know, you just sound a bit out of touch with the reality is all. Both of their sanghas have acknowledged their behaviors. These cases are not about defamation but abuses of authority. What a nice attempt at distracting us from the actual issues, though. If Sasaki, or Shimano, would like to file suit against the many women who have voiced their complaints and published them, they’re certainly free to do so. I don’t think anyone is even slightly scared of that reality, however, as a counterclaim would soon follow and recovery of lawyer fees would be requested.

I don’t think that will be happening anytime soon, though. That would mean they will be in the very place they would not like to be: court. There are things called cross examinations and eyewitness testimony. There’s that little thing that gets in the way of not facing reality called truth.

You see, again, you fail to understand that defamation, at heart, is not true; that is, the one who defames another knows it not to be true and states it anyway, doing so maliciously, attempting to discredit or ruin someone based on made up facts. That’s how it is in the United States, for what it’s worth. Oh, and lawyers here seldom ever take on defamation cases, as they are costly and extraordinarily hard to prove.

All this said? You’re entitled to your opinions and you’re free to practice with anyone you like. Some of us would like to see an end to the hero worship you characterize so well in your talk about who the greatest are, as if we’re discussing baseball batting averages or something. So long as you’re hooked on the personality of “the greatest teachers”, I guess you don’t have to think or do much for yourself. For some people, that’s attractive (as we see).

Too much doublespeak for me. You’re practicing apologetics. I don’t know who you are or what your exact agenda is, but clearly you have one. I find your focus wholly misguided and misdirected, and certainly not in keeping with the most paramount of all precepts: sentient beings are numberless, I vow to save them all. Or, whatever translation you might like. The bottom line is: help this world. Sexually preying upon those who come to you for spiritual matters is hardly in line with the spirit of that directive.

Regarding the media reporting on all this and what they do and don’t report on? Well, The New York Times certainly picked up both stories. You can bet your ass they wouldn’t get involved without good evidence, which is readily available, again, at both the sasakiarchive.com and shimanoarchive.com.

I am not “hooked”, I never had teachers that brought similar trouble. My question was not about “the greatest”, I just want to know if Shimano and Sasaki had a huge crowd of followers. That tells us s.th. at least about their ability to be interesting and attract. From there, once again, we could acknowledge their zen standing and ability to transmit zen wisdom. That is my agenda. People did go there (and still go) to listen to Shimano’s zen talk, don’t they? So Shimano might still have s.th. to say.

My agenda is simply: I do not share this bashing on grounds of his sexual conduct. I understand that those who feel (ab)used do so, but I do not subscribe that others just follow in their footsteps, people like me who were not used by him. We have no reason to do so. What would it be? The fear to be ridiculed by the masses? Some sort of political correctness? If someone like me would feel betrayed because he thinks Shimano could never have meant what he said about zen only because he has character flaws, well then I’d just be a fool. What is done here or by Oppenheimer is often imbalanced. Because I was no fool from the beginning (contrary to what you believe) I am NEVER surprised by revelations like here. It is those who had the illusions who seem to have limited ways to deal with that problem. When they go to the next sangha, they will uphold their illusions, and that is the biggest problem of all: Again they will expect their teacher to be morally perfect. Or if they don’t, they probably stay away.

The same people who did not see through Shimano for decades (and even got inka, for whatever this is worth) are now supposed to suddenly understand him. That’s hardly convincing. It is much more probable that they are still misled. The example of handing over the Archive to someone obviously not neutral (or: you make the same mistake of illusioning an ideal zen teacher again) is one argument. So why should we suddenly trust those who had all those illusions with this case now, unless some virus or miraculous awakening has shattered all of them to the truth?

Pardon my language, but I fear that we are dealing with the same idiots who trusted zen teachers too much from the beginning.

It’s interesting to see the general response to this latest ‘shimano dharma successor’, which seems to be that he is not a real teacher at all. Whilst that is probably true, doesn’t it also mean that actually none of the dharma heirs in american zen are real teachers? Most of them admit their teachers were highly flawed, which can only mean their training is also suspect.

I cannot for the life of me understand why they don’t disassociate themselves from the whole sordid nonsense, and actually start again with some real, sincere practice. But then I suppose they wouldn’t be able to wear robes, lead retreats and indulge their egos…

I cannot for the life of me understand why they don’t disassociate themselves from the whole sordid nonsense, and actually start again with some real, sincere practice. But then I suppose they wouldn’t be able to wear robes, lead retreats and indulge their egos.

About Sweeping Zen

Established in 2009 as a grassroots initiative, Sweeping Zen is a digital archive of information on Zen Buddhism. Featuring in-depth interviews, an extensive database of biographies, news, articles, podcasts, teacher blogs, events, directories and more, this site is dedicated to offering the public a range of views in the sphere of Zen Buddhist thought. We are also endeavoring to continue creating lineage charts for all Western Zen lines, doing our own small part in advancing historical documentation on this fabulous import of an ancient tradition. Come on in with a tea or coffee. You're always bound to find something new.

Sweeping Zen is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.